Posted: 3/29/2023 4:21:56 PM EDT
|
What I’m thinking of is as the Subject line says. Providing a list of references that would be submitted to the Local CLEO and/or the FFL where the purchase takes place. This list of references should include in priority: Those listed will only be listed by Drivers License # and Contact phone # (1) List a relative, Grandparent, Parent, Sibling, Uncle, Cousin (2) Spouse or Significant other (3) Friend(s) (4) Co-workers (5) Any other persons that can attest to your intent to purchase a firearm *** For states that still have the CCW process, CCW holders being excepted*** This way the FFL can make a phone call to any ONE person listed or more if they choose, of THEIR choice, that can attest to any reason that' this person should not be allowed to purchase said firearm. The he/she/it that committed the murders in Nashville reportedly notified a friend of her intentions. This has happened enough in the past where people knew about the murderers state of mind. Obviously, you wouldn’t list someone you’d have a grievance with or you know their political stance. - I wouldn’t list my own mother, because of her political views cloud any real reasoning, even though she knows I wouldn’t dream of harming anyone unless they tried to seriously harm someone I care about or myself. - Father, no problem(yes they’re still married to each other) -Brothers and sisters, no issue there -Wife of 23 years - Ultimately no problem, but those of you that are married know how that can go, lol -Friends - No problem -Co-workers What problems does anyone foresee with this? |
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
357
EE: 100% (4)
SC, USA
|
I couldn’t agree more about repealing all the laws that have no effect in reducing crime and infringe on rights. As to your comment of “Stop thinking and post less” - you’re acting like a jerk. If we as gun owners, stop thinking of ways to end the violence committed by a bunch of insane a$$holes, then that’s what you and the rest of us gun owners get is a bunch of stupid laws that have little to no affect at reducing crime. You’re really gonna leave that up to our elected politicians to implement “Red Flag laws” that circumvent due process? Think it through. What I was suggesting is strictly left up to the firearm purchaser. Only the purchaser can provide sources that will know whether they’re a nut-case or not. At anytime that list needs to be amended, it’s up to the purchaser to amend it. If you divorce, have an argument with a friend or believe someone on your list will act out of spite, rather than someone with honest intimate knowledge of the purchaser. If you don’t have anything of value to add, whether it’s pro or con, then go pound sand somewhere else and leave it to the adults in the room. |
|
Originally Posted By montanabound: I couldn’t agree more about repealing all the laws that have no effect in reducing crime and infringe on rights. As to your comment of “Stop thinking and post less” - you’re acting like a jerk. If we as gun owners, stop thinking of ways to end the violence committed by a bunch of insane a$$holes, then that’s what you and the rest of us gun owners get is a bunch of stupid laws that have little to no affect at reducing crime. You’re really gonna leave that up to our elected politicians to implement “Red Flag laws” that circumvent due process? Think it through. What I was suggesting is strictly left up to the firearm purchaser. Only the purchaser can provide sources that will know whether they’re a nut-case or not. At anytime that list needs to be amended, it’s up to the purchaser to amend it. If you divorce, have an argument with a friend or believe someone on your list will act out of spite, rather than someone with honest intimate knowledge of the purchaser. If you don’t have anything of value to add, whether it’s pro or con, then go pound sand somewhere else and leave it to the adults in the room. Your idea is terrible. It’s so unbelievably stupid I’m not sure what more there is to discuss. |
|
Bad idea. Why not not just require a psychiatrist's sign off. Or some other egregious infringement of our rights. Or the .gov could even prosecute criminals. That would be a refreshing change. Or elected officials could stop trying to convince trannys and other wackos the rest of us are out to get them. In case you missed it, that's a very bad idea. |
Member Ranstad's Militia
You ever notice that no one says "don't judge me" when they've done something positive? - gearjammer351
Do it. GD needs entertainment. Your misery will amuse us. - Cypselus
You ever notice that no one says "don't judge me" when they've done something positive? - gearjammer351
Do it. GD needs entertainment. Your misery will amuse us. - Cypselus
Joined:
Jul 2023
Posts:
28
EE: 0% (0)
ID, USA
|
OP, I have had and mentioned similar ideas in the past and also got negative responses from people who like to be critical but can't offer up better ideas to save their lives. What you are suggesting is sort of replacing government regulations with industry self regulating factors if I am reading you right. It's not un constitutional because it would all be done by private business. Yes this would be better then the current system. |
Joined:
Jul 2023
Posts:
29
EE: 0% (0)
ID, USA
|
Originally Posted By THE_RESISTER: OP, I have had and mentioned similar ideas in the past and also got negative responses from people who like to be critical but can't offer up better ideas to save their lives. What you are suggesting is sort of replacing government regulations with industry self regulating factors if I am reading you right. It's not un constitutional because it would all be done by private business. Yes this would be better then the current system. The current system, where fudds continue to prop up Wayne and his Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom style African hunts and lavish lifestyle while constantly losing ground on gun rights. Where the gun industry was responsible for $80.73 billion of economic activity in 2022 but we, as a group of consumers, can't manage to draw a cohesive line in the sand with our political leaders when it comes to protecting our 2nd amendment rights. Let's face it, the typical American gun owner is as good at self advocacy as they are at training... they talk about "The Dicken" and "Dot Torture" on the internet but don't fire more than 50 rounds of ammunition a month because they are too cheap and unmotivated to train. Similarly, they bitch about their gun rights on ARFCOM but do little more than vote every 4 years to protect them. Edit: for clarity, I'm agreeing with you and adding supportive reasoning behind the state of affairs. Sometimes when I do this it seems like I'm arguing against whomever I'm quoting. |
|
Here are some issues just off the top. The purchase should be a private transaction, between buyer and seller. Involving other people brings in, among other potential concerns, issues of privacy; it's nobody else's business. Involving coworkers in a process like this is unprofessional at the very least. As suggested it also brings in the possibility of fraud. Unless you are expecting the FFL (or other seller) to do a background check on the references provided, in which case there are more privacy concerns etc. Finally, this implicitly requires the purchaser to have a family, or friends for that matter. This requirement as it stands penalizes people who are new to an area, or are just loners, and is a feature ripe for abuse by the government. |
Friends don't let friends buy plastic SIGs.
Joined:
Apr 2008
Posts:
2605
EE: 100% (131)
CHE
|
Originally Posted By THE_RESISTER: IT'S BETTER than just accepting the slow decline we are in for gun rights. SOMEONE is thinking outside the box. Quick, crucify him! Yeah, more hoops to jump through definitely stops the 'decline in gun rights.' |
"Life is Hard, its Harder if You're Stupid" - John Wayne
Joined:
Jul 2023
Posts:
52
EE: 0% (0)
ID, USA
|
Originally Posted By SpankMonkey: OP have some balls. Let me spell it out really clear for you. GOD gave us our rights! Not man. While you are 100% correct you are failing to see the reality of the dire situation we are in. Stating it's our right till we are blue in the face will do nothing to turn the tide. The details can be worked out but first there must be a will to visit the idea. |
Joined:
Jul 2023
Posts:
53
EE: 0% (0)
ID, USA
QC Doktor...soldier, scholar, funnyman, raconteur
Joined:
Feb 2001
Posts:
37617
EE: 0% (0)
AL, USA
|
Originally Posted By montanabound: What I’m thinking of is as the Subject line says. Providing a list of references that would be submitted to the Local CLEO and/or the FFL where the purchase takes place. This list of references should include in priority: Those listed will only be listed by Drivers License # and Contact phone # (1) List a relative, Grandparent, Parent, Sibling, Uncle, Cousin (2) Spouse or Significant other (3) Friend(s) (4) Co-workers (5) Any other persons that can attest to your intent to purchase a firearm *** For states that still have the CCW process, CCW holders being excepted*** This way the FFL can make a phone call to any ONE person listed or more if they choose, of THEIR choice, that can attest to any reason that' this person should not be allowed to purchase said firearm. The he/she/it that committed the murders in Nashville reportedly notified a friend of her intentions. This has happened enough in the past where people knew about the murderers state of mind. Obviously, you wouldn’t list someone you’d have a grievance with or you know their political stance. - I wouldn’t list my own mother, because of her political views cloud any real reasoning, even though she knows I wouldn’t dream of harming anyone unless they tried to seriously harm someone I care about or myself. - Father, no problem(yes they’re still married to each other) -Brothers and sisters, no issue there -Wife of 23 years - Ultimately no problem, but those of you that are married know how that can go, lol -Friends - No problem -Co-workers What problems does anyone foresee with this? Attached File Attached File |
"Audemus jura nostra defendere"
|
Originally Posted By montanabound: I couldn’t agree more about repealing all the laws that have no effect in reducing crime and infringe on rights. As to your comment of “Stop thinking and post less” - you’re acting like a jerk. If we as gun owners, stop thinking of ways to end the violence committed by a bunch of insane a$$holes, then that’s what you and the rest of us gun owners get is a bunch of stupid laws that have little to no affect at reducing crime. You’re really gonna leave that up to our elected politicians to implement “Red Flag laws” that circumvent due process? Think it through. What I was suggesting is strictly left up to the firearm purchaser. Only the purchaser can provide sources that will know whether they’re a nut-case or not. At anytime that list needs to be amended, it’s up to the purchaser to amend it. If you divorce, have an argument with a friend or believe someone on your list will act out of spite, rather than someone with honest intimate knowledge of the purchaser. If you don’t have anything of value to add, whether it’s pro or con, then go pound sand somewhere else and leave it to the adults in the room. There’s definitely someone acting like a jerk here. |
GD is like putting on crampons and walking through a room full of puppies.
|
Originally Posted By CatfishHunter: You've been a member for almost 13 years, have less than 10 posts & this is the crap you decide to start a thread about...  I vote sleeper account. We’ll see what kinds of things he says during next year’s elections. |
GD is like putting on crampons and walking through a room full of puppies.
Join the Community
Your next conversation starts here.
Create your free account to join discussions, share your experience, save topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.
- Join discussions
- Follow topics and replies
- Connect with fellow enthusiasts
Already a member? Sign in
Stay informed by subscribing to our Newsletter