In most of the southern U.S. it's worth more than the trailer it would be going to live in
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
In most of the southern U.S. it's worth more than the trailer it would be going to live in
Assuming you secure the gun safe to the trailer, what do you then secure the trailer too? It’s not like those trailers are bullet proof in their construction.
Well I was assuming it had something to do with an assumption that if someone is prepared to break into a house clearly there is no point in trying to stop them stealing the guns because they are obviously some Moriarty like evil genius and therefore cannot be stopped from opening a safe once they have mastered the basics evil genius move of kicking in the back door, I stand to be corrected though.
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
It's almost as if criminals don't care for the law.
But yes, let's ensure that before someone violates your rights and breaks into your house, lets violate your rights first so they only get off with the jewelry while not having a care in the world. Thanks mom.
It's almost as if criminals don't care for the law.
But yes, let's ensure that before someone violates your rights and breaks into your house, lets violate your rights first so they only get off with the jewelry while not having a care in the world. Thanks mom.
I forgot, your one of the wanna be John Waynes, shooting it out over the kitchen table with, when you turn the lights on, it turns out to be your kid sneaking home from a late night.
Just buy a Mustang for gods sake, it will give you the same feeling of false confidence but your family will be immeasurably safer
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
Your use of “numpty” to describe firearms owners aside, gun safes aren’t expensive at all, you can get an 8-gun from Canadian Tire for $200, less if you wait for it to go on sale
Yeah but how many Americans are gonna want to go through all the hassle of finding the nearest Canadian Tire?
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Barnet Flame For This Useful Post:
I forgot, your one of the wanna be John Waynes, shooting it out over the kitchen table with, when you turn the lights on, it turns out to be your kid sneaking home from a late night.
Just buy a Mustang for gods sake, it will give you the same feeling of false confidence but your family will be immeasurably safer
I'm one of the people who believes you don't lose your rights because of the actions of criminals.
I'm one of the people who believes you don't lose your rights because of the actions of criminals.
Having background checks or rules about safe storage doesn't infringe on someone's rights to keep and bear arms in order to be able to form a well regulated militia to keep the State "free".
Rights also come with responsibilities.
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Red Slinger For This Useful Post:
Having background checks or rules about safe storage doesn't infringe on someone's rights to keep and bear arms in order to be able to form a well regulated militia to keep the State "free".
Rights also come with responsibilities.
Where did I say I'm against those actions? I'm all for those things. What I'm not for, is removal of rights because someone could just break into your house, break into your safe and take your firearms.
Except that a registry is the way you establish and enforce responsibility. That is the problem with the current system, and the United States in general. There is little to no responsibility for one's actions. If there was a registry for weapons you bought and own, you would be damn certain to show more responsibility over your guns, and make sure you were certain who the weapon was sold to, should you sell the gun. This lack of responsibility mechanism is what allows for the flow of untraceable guns in society.
What are you talking about? Tracing a weapon has nothing to do with the background process, and vice versa. A NICS inquiry is basically a check for the existence of federal or state warrant or criminal adjudication against a subject. The NICS query checks the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and the Interstate Identification Index databases for wants and warrants. The NICS database identifies purchases you have made so it can be established if you are accruing an unreasonably large number of weapons in a short period of time. This is the extent of the background, and is pretty quick to go through. This has nothing to do with establishing a gun registry or collection of the gun ownership details.
The reason the government would like the ownership records digitized is for the investigation of weapons used in a crime, and to establish providence for the location of that weapon. This is all common sense and fully expected with so many other things we own. I don't know why people continue to swallow the garbage the NRA peddles. Read the second amendment. It says nothing the NRA is promoting.
Canada has no registry for non-restricted firearms, yet we don't have an issue with people showing responsibility for their firearms.
As to the second part, my post was in response to wittynickname claiming that the NRA did not want to modernize background checks and that the information used for them is kept on paper. I'm well aware that the NICS system and the Tracing Center are different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaramonLS
That's a gun cabinet. Not a safe. Also it's on sale for $124.99 this week at Canadian Tire.
Safes are still pretty crazy expensive.
For the purposes of Canadian laws surrounding storage, it's a safe. Legal precedent trumps what a manufacturer calls their product.
I'm one of the people who believes you don't lose your rights because of the actions of criminals.
I'm one of those people that doesn't think a 230 year old document is infallible and should be taken as gospel. It was written in the context of its time and has been twisted in perverse ways to apply its words to modern society. If we are unwilling to modify the document and our laws then they will inevitably fail.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to dobbles For This Useful Post:
I'm one of those people that doesn't think a 230 year old document is infallible and should be taken as gospel. It was written in the context of its time and has been twisted in perverse ways to apply its words to modern society. If we are unwilling to modify the document and our laws then they will inevitably fail.
There was never any evidence of an individual right to own guns until the late 2000's. That's the irony of it all. The status of individual gun rights is tenuous at best.
I'm one of those people that doesn't think a 230 year old document is infallible and should be taken as gospel. It was written in the context of its time and has been twisted in perverse ways to apply its words to modern society. If we are unwilling to modify the document and our laws then they will inevitably fail.
Not even the gospel should be taken as gospel.
On a serious note, you are completely right.
The Following User Says Thank You to Barnet Flame For This Useful Post:
Maybe that's the way to get rid of gun owners who feel that they need to have magazine fed high velocity engines of death and destruction.
Draw them into a final confrontation with the goberment
"Oh my the government is oppressive and going to take away my rights to bear arms. I'm grabbing bessie my AR-15 and me and my buds in the 5th Alabama Volunteer Militia are going to seize back power.
10 minutes later a bunch of fat out of shape sweat hogs with AR-15's and AK-47's are facing a United States Marine battalion supported by armor, helicopter gun ships and artillery.
"Here's my gun sir, I've seen the futility of my ways and would like to go home now . . . alive"
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
I'm one of those people that doesn't think a 230 year old document is infallible and should be taken as gospel. It was written in the context of its time and has been twisted in perverse ways to apply its words to modern society. If we are unwilling to modify the document and our laws then they will inevitably fail.
Not to mention the fact that the current interpretation of the 2A is only about 40 years old itself, and the Supreme Court support for the current interpretation only goes back to the 1990s.
The current interpretation is also a product of its time: where the NRA spent hundreds of millions of dollars promoting the 'cause'.
Times change, which is why people should never back down in the face of 2A absolutists, like the pair in this very thread.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Resolute 14 For This Useful Post:
