Hypocrisy? Or just double standards?

[IronMonster]

Its for your own good

Swat team raid because fellow recorded his court hearing on his Iphone.

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

 

[balaperdida]

Agree. It is hypocrisy.

 

[IronMonster]

Thank you, I was beginning to think I was on my own here

 

[Just Jim]

No sir you are not on your own. I just find you want a better world rather than the way it really is. You can speak out for a lifetime and show people all the facts to further your cause but people will not listen.

 

[IronMonster]

I had no delusions that they would.

I know the world is not what it was 20, 30 or 50 years ago.

It would be nice though if at least the self proclaimed gun enthusiasts went the right way (freedom and self accountability) rather than the wrong one.

 

[Just Jim]

You are right that it would be a better world but the world today is run by the left. As long as a man has to live under their laws it can never be a better place. Yet people are not smart enough to vote for better servants.

It is great people like you come along to show the changes. Gives young people a chance to get smart

 

[IronMonster]

Whoa now, I'm just another idiot with an opinion.

 

[Just Jim]

Ain't we all

 

[44mag2ndamend]

we should have background checks to post on the internet.

Absolutely, that way the anti's would have to disclose their intentions of the violating their first and fourth amendment rights.

Control everything, no freedom left.

Then we could throw them in Jail for violating the Constitution and being a danger to themselves and society. They live that way due in part because they hate rules. A little more educated now, enabling them to make attempts to tear down the system.

 

[Just Jim]

Like I said...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3204728/posts

 

[jbett98]

Might as well sue the sign maker "No Guns Allowed In This Theater" as that didn't work as advertized.

 

[Stomper]

Might as well sue the sign maker "No Guns Allowed In This Theater" as that didn't work as advertized.

You know, that might JUST WORK!!

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

FWIW, I've made no secret of the fact that if someone wants to sell a firearm and wishes to require me to have a CPL then that is a deal killer. I'll show my ID and even sign a bill of sale (which is what I require) but there is no legal reason that I should have a CPL unless I carry concealed. It isn't required for me to purchase a firearm from a dealer and it isn't required for me to carry in Washington. At worst we are at a holding pattern where those requiring it are limiting their potential market to a select subset of people that can legally own firearms. I refuse to ask permission of the state to exercise a right as long as there is still a way to exercise it without doing so. I'll not support a system designed to cause us to submit our rights to an authority that can arbitrarily change them.

 

[deen_ad]

<- Why there aren't any school shootings in Israel!
Teacher with long gun slung over her shoulder!!!

I like selling to a CCW because I am sure they are not a criminal. I don't want to arm the bad guys.

That's EXACTLY why I do that, although in WA it's a CPL.

Deen
NRA Life Member, Benefactor Level
NRA Golden Eagle member
Defender of Freedom Award

"A gun is like a parachute. If you need one and don't have it, you'll probably never need one again!"

 

[deen_ad]

<- Why there aren't any school shootings in Israel!
Teacher with long gun slung over her shoulder!!!

Sorry that happened to you. I had my first .22 rifle arrive at my folks' door by the local mailman!

Not me, we drove over to Portland in 1959, I paid for it and we took it home. I was 12 at the time.

Deen
NRA Life Member, Benefactor Level
NRA Golden Eagle member
Defender of Freedom Award

"A gun is like a parachute. If you need one and don't have it, you'll probably never need one again!"

 

[IronMonster]

On the national average 10 percent of adults have a felony conviction. There are 7 million people in Washington so lets assume we have 700,000 felons There are 400,000 CPL holders So there are roughly 6.3 million people in the state of Washington who are eligible to own a firearm, Only 400,000 of which have a CPL. By requiring a CPL you are saying you will only sell to about 6% of the people who are legally able to purchase the firearm from you. 94% of law abiding citizens, who are 100% legally able to purchase a firearm in a face to fact transaction do not have a CPL.

Under the current law you I am almost certain you are not even required by law to show ID for a instate face to face transaction. You simply show up, ask the person if they are legally able to buy a gun and you take their money. Done and 100% and your hands are clean. If that person uses that gun in a crime you are not responsible (Just like if you sell a car to a guy and he drives it drunk into a buss full of kids killing everyone, sad, but not your fault)

You are not responsible even if the person was prohibited from buying a firearm, unless they specifically state they are not legally able to own it and you sell it to them anyway.

No one wants to arm a bad guy, but to decided that 94% of people who are able to buy the gun legally from you are not "good enough" simply because they dont have a CPL taking it to the extreme

And for that matter a huge percentage of guns used for nefarious deeds are purchased legally by those able to pass a background check. I dont know how you could prove it but I bet that the actual number of guns that are sold on places like NWFA or Armslist that are used in crimes is so small that it could be dismissed as a statistical rounding error. Of course the Anti gun folks are sure that we are all evil and arming gangs and cartels by the hundreds.


I dont expect to change anyone's mind, And I fully expect I-594 to pass (even though I am fighting tooth and nail against it) so the whole point will be moot soon I suspect.
.

 

[Koda]

For the last few weeks every time I have seen a "Must have CPL" in a listing I think, well there is one gun owner who is already on board with background checks. Who doesn't think he has the ability to make up his mind who is a "good guy" on his own but needs the government to tell him.

I can understand why someone would require the FTF buyer to possess a vaild CHL. Its not just the moral requirement to make certain you don't sell to a prohibited person... its also the legal risk if you do even if you truly didn't know... simply the easiest path is to require the CHL.

I'm on the Constitutional Carry side of the idea of a permit to exercise a right. But I dont think the permit is going away anytime soon. The problem that I have with the actual background check is of course the registration part. You would think if they, the gun control crowd, truly wanted to support the 2A while keeping guns out of the hands of criminals... like many of them claim (MDA), then they would push for background checks without the registration part. No make, model, serial number.... just a BG check for all sales. If you think about that you'd see that would pass voters easily so why dont they adjust... well, if you also think about that it becomes clear their intentions have nothing to do with supporting the 2A, they are a lying sack of traitors... to put it nicely. They know the first step is registration.

 

[IronMonster]

I can understand why someone would require the FTF buyer to possess a vaild CHL. Its not just the moral requirement to make certain you don't sell to a prohibited person... its also the legal risk if you do even if you truly didn't know... simply the easiest path is to require the CHL.

I dont think there is the legal risk that you (and everyone else) assumes. Have you ever heard about someone going to jail because he unknowingly sold a felon a gun? I bet you haven't because its not a crime to sell someone a gun unless you know they are prohibited.

Have you ever even heard about a person being sued because they unknowingly provided a criminal with a gun? Typically lawsuits come about because of money. And sad as it is, about 99% of us here have nothing worth suing for. It would cost tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to attempt such a suit, and most of us dont have enough assets to even begin to cover the legal fees.

Its a moral thing, We all want to feel like we are doing our part (and we should do our part)

And your right, The easiest path is to simply refuse to sell to the 94% of people who are legally able to buy the firearm but do not have a CPL.

 

[GunRightsCoalition]

..............
You would think if they, the gun control crowd, truly wanted to support the 2A while keeping guns out of the hands of criminals... like many of them claim (MDA), then they would push for background checks without the registration part. No make, model, serial number.... just a BG check for all sales.
.............................

Correct, and if they had done so then our fight would be a lost cause. They bit off too much with I-594 and that at least gives us a fighting chance.

 

[IronMonster]

Nevermind