XPost: talk.politics.guns, uk.politics.guns, aus.politics.guns   
   From: No_email_for_you@wahoo.com   
      
   RD Sandman  wrote in   
   news:XnsA315C28A67E6EHopewell@216.196.121.131:   
      
   > "Dechucka"  wrote in   
   > news:MNudnbTgotn11snOnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:   
   >   
   >>   
   >> "Guy Fawkes"  wrote in message   
   >> news:XnsA3156DF5FF69CWereofftoseethewizrd@78.46.70.116...   
   >>> "Dechucka"  wrote in   
   >>> news:VeOdnbZmPbyJkM7OnZ2dnUVZ_q-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> snip   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>>>> so you could be and in this rather pedantic e.g. 9 on my part)   
   >>>>>>>> you're wrong   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Except the government has no idea it happened (I have been there   
   >>>>>>> before with beer).  It is like the "universal background check"   
   >>>>>>> that some are crying for.  There is no way to make it work   
   >>>>>>> without a registry and virtually everyone in the gun community   
   >>>>>>> rejects that.  I am one of them. I am in favor of the UBC **IF**   
   >>>>>>> it can be done without registration but I don't see how it could   
   >>>>>>> be.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> A UBC to weed out the loons etc would be good as well as   
   >>>>>> tightening up on the private/gun show sales but that isn't going   
   >>>>>> to happen   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Some points to ponder.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> 1.  UBC and tightening up up private sales are basically the same   
   >>>>> thing since that is what UBC is intended to address.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Good start   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> 2.  How do you do a UBC without a registration of firearms which is   
   >>>>> the major stumbling block..Even Canada is junking their   
   >>>>> registration system as they have less than 50% compliance.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Make it illegal to sell to anyone who hasn't passed a got a   
   >>>> Background Check ticket, very much like our working with children   
   >>>> background checks   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> 3.  The federal government does not have the constitutional   
   >>>>> authority to monitor sales of private property between private   
   >>>>> individuals unless the sale crosses state lines.  One reason why 16   
   >>>>> states have done so on their own.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Good that leaves the majority to do something   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> 4.  One thing the feds could do would be to tighten up the   
   >>>>> definition of who and what are considered to be dealers.  Currently   
   >>>>> that definition is very loose....consisting basically of "If you   
   >>>>> make a living at it you are dealer."  Hmmm, how many guns can I   
   >>>>> sell without being accused of making my living selling guns?  How   
   >>>>> big IS my collection?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> 5.  There is NO federal law that applies outside of a gun show that   
   >>>>> doesn't also apply within one.  Same laws all apply.  Some states   
   >>>>> have laws that treat sales within a gun show more strictly than   
   >>>>> outside of one but the feds don't.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> good there is a good place to start.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Will it do any good in the US probably not   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> I have a better idea. Expel the liberals. That should imporove things   
   >>> immeasurably   
   >>   
   >> or maybe big camps where work could make them free   
   >>   
   >   
   > Some liberals don't want to work.  They just want to hang out and have   
   > other people give them money and food stamps.   
   >   
      
   Our work makes them free. Hey, wait a minute...   
      
   --   
   When the government is no longer constrained by the laws of the land, then   
   neither are the people.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)