JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Given:
1. There should never be licensing for rights (but the government continually does it)
2. We already have an ATF gun registry (if you truly believe we don't, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'm selling cheap)

Would you trade having a 'gun license', very similar to car license, renewable every 5 years (government has to get their money somehow) for:

  1. Abolishment of the NFA
  2. Abolishment of the 'F' in ATF (we get to keep our dogs)
  3. All the anti gun groups get dis-banded
  4. We no longer get pestered by every gun group in the country for more money to fight something
So, if you obtained a 'gun license',
  1. you could buy as many as you want
  2. you could buy what you want - with a car license I can buy a Yugo or a Dodge Hellcat, no limits on what I can buy.
    1. Maybe full auto, explosive rounds would require an advanced license, kinda like truck drivers need now
  3. no waiting period
  4. can buy and sell to others with a license with no government intervention
  5. concealed carry available nation wide, no restrictions (court houses, airports, etc)
  6. any politician or citizen that tries to create or introduce gun restrictions would be tried for treason and executed
  7. persons using a gun in the act of a felony get minimum 25 years in prison - no chance of parole. If there is a death in the felony, mandated life in prison.
Would you trade the 'right' to bear arms we have now, which is under constant attack and will continue to be (they have nothing to lose by keeping at it), for a 'Gun License' ?

Personally, I'm not sure. I despise government taxation (licenses, fees, permits, etc) for our rights.
Definition - Licenses, fees, permits are instituted by governments to take away natural rights and 'sell' them back to us.​
But, if it made guns a non issue like cars are now, I might consider it.

Thoughts/Comments?
 
Abolishing the entire NFA, GCA, all the Fed gun control laws and amendments, would also mean no more FFLs requirements, no more "interstate commerce license requirements", no more interstate mail restrictions...

And also, if it means a person can get 100% of their Rights back after serving time...then eh, yeah sure, lets do that.
decriminalizing gun possession by "prohibited persons"... that is going to be the one sticking point and why the majority of gun owners won't abolish such laws :s0054:

Edit. When was the last time anyone in Congress or White House passed any gun control repealment laws, without coming up with another one? The AWB sunsetting doesn't count.
 
hXFxA26.png

With a side order of constitutional carry, please.
 
TRADE?


Nope. NO COMPROMISE. Besides.....I know how to read. While they don't. Thus, I KNOW they are WRONG.

Isn't that reason enough?

Aloha, Mark
 
<Quote>
Abolishing the entire NFA, GCA, all the Fed gun control laws and amendments, would also mean no more FFLs requirements, no more "interstate commerce license requirements", no more interstate mail restrictions...

And also, if it means a person can get 100% of their Rights back after serving time...then eh, yeah sure, lets do that.
decriminalizing gun possession by "prohibited persons"... that is going to be the one sticking point and why the majority of gun owners won't abolish such laws :s0054:


If they sold a license I could see them telling someone on parole they could not get one. If they can show they are willing to be a productive member of society? Great, I would have no problem. It is amazing to me that so many have ZERO problems with drunks who kill and ruin lives being handed a license to drive again. Often multiple times. This is no problem.:confused:
People can run from Cops, kill someone, so a short stint, and gun owners and others have no problem handing them a license again.
I have long said that if someone does not want to be part of society they should be removed from it. Instead we pass more and more laws that only punish those who are not a problem. :mad:
 
  • any politician or citizen that tries to create or introduce gun restrictions would be tried for treason and executed
Problem is, in order to have a license, you have to have a test. In order to have a test, you have to define qualifications and standards.

It won't be "restricting gun rights" - it'll be "improving standards to increase safety/close loopholes/blablabla".

So, today it's: no one clinically diagnosed with schizophrenia. Tomorrow it morphs to no one who has ever even contemplated calling a self help line. Hell, maybe with the social credit scoring thing coming toward us you'll have to make sure your exes don't tank your score/reviews into non-gun owning territory.

Like ALL licensing, it'll eventually require some form of insurance and will disproportionally screw the poor.

So, I can see what you're going for and in a perfect world, it'd be a worthwhile trade. But I know how people work, how politics work, and know just how far from perfect this world is. And in this imperfect world, it's an idea that I'm going to hard pass on.

Sorry, mate. No thanks.
 
Problem is, in order to have a license, you have to have a test. In order to have a test, you have to define qualifications and standards.
And this could eventually 'require' some sort of attendance in a gun related 'social group' (such as a 'gun club' ) whereby you are 'evaluated' by the members to determine your eligibility as a 'gun owner' - as seems to be the case in other countries.
 
The Govt doesn't TEST someone before they are allowed to VOTE.

And, for the record.......I'm NOT against the Death Penalty either.

See how that works?

Aloha, Mark
 
Conditional yes.

Depending on the abolition of anti gun groups not being temporary or ensuring a block preventing their reconstituted form. Clear guidelines on what the denial or revocation or a license is along with support of due process to re establish licensing. And codify how this is done to ensure that 2A can no longer be infringed on while noting licensing is done as a taxation to fund training and support of ownership

Shouldn't be necessary, of course, but neither should us defending the right against retard politicians and voters in our respective states.
 
Your list sounds like things I already enjoy for the most part, so I'd be gaining little and giving a bonafide open registry
 
No, because you KNOW the Grabber sh!tstains will do a Darth Vader and "alter the deal" however they can at EVERY opportunity.

Here's my counterproposal, I'll keep my guns and my rights and they can go spitroast each other until they either choke out or rupture bowels.
 
So, I can see what you're going for and in a perfect world, it'd be a worthwhile trade. But I know how people work, how politics work, and know just how far from perfect this world is. And in this imperfect world, it's an idea that I'm going to hard pass on.

Sorry, mate. No thanks.
Bingo, the OP assumes acting in good faith, which we ALL know that the Grabbers and their Kapo Knobgobblers *stares pointedly at unnamed "supporting" vendor* are pathologically incapable of.
 
Government never keeps its word. To them a contract (like the Constitution) is not binding, and they can change their mind at any time. If you doubt this, ask any Ukrainian about trusting the word of the US Government!
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top