Ok Gun regulators answer me this question.

[Barbbtx]

I'm not one to see race discrimination around every corner (in fact almost never.) However, to me it looks like the question they wanted answered was the race one and just threw in the other questions to look more legit.

 

[Winston Smith]

Criminals also rarely apply for pistol permits, and so any such information, in conjunction with the information on said pistol permits, will rarely, if ever, be useful.

The licensee and the perpetrator won't always be the same person, but it's useful to determine whether they are either way. It also helps to verify whether the person carrying a weapon is the person who's licensed, regardless of whether any other crime has been committed. I'm not saying I approve of New York's licensing laws--I don't--but I can see reasons for asking an applicant's race that don't have to do with any kind of discrimination.

 

[Boomyal]

More importantly, why do they need to know your weight?

They need to know how high to dial up the Taser!

 

[Cold Highway]

After my shift at work I still dont get an answer, kinda funny.

 

[kaya'08]

Why do I need to be searched and have my information and biological data recorded for exercising a right?

At least you can have guns. If you came to Europe you'd stop complaining. Actually, here in Europe you can obtain a gun with a license, but its a tedious process. We have two guns in the house, very untypical for your average European.

 

[TurtleDude]

Applying what one county does regarding a registration sheet asking for a person's race on a firearms permit to all people who favor firearm regulations is like applying what Seung Hi-Cho did at Virginia Tech to all owners of firearms. It is highly disingenuous.

While I favor local regulations of firearms, especially assault weapons, I do not favor gun permits that ask for a person's race.

what is an assault weapon and why do they need more regulation given no matter how you construe that term-assault weapons are rarely used in crimes

 

[TurtleDude]

At least you can have guns. If you came to Europe you'd stop complaining. Actually, here in Europe you can obtain a gun with a license, but its a tedious process. We have two guns in the house, very untypical for your average European.

Poltiicians who deny their citizens the right to own guns are a cancer upon freedom

 

[Boomyal]

At least you can have guns. If you came to Europe you'd stop complaining. ....

I guess we will quit complaining when Freddy Krueger has finally been put to rest!

 

[ricksfolly]

Poltiicians who deny their citizens the right to own guns are a cancer upon freedom

And those who need guns to protect themselves from imaginary threats need head work.

ricksfolly

 

[Boomyal]

And those who need guns to protect themselves from imaginary threats need head work.

ricksfolly

Independant is just another word for LIBERAL. Your statement verifies it. The Constitution guarantees that right, as recently upheld by the Supreme Court, whether you see a need for it or not!

 

[Goobieman]

Voting is a right. So is getting married and having children.

How do the last two fall into this conversation?

But there are standards that go along with those things, as well, and the least of which is having your information, child spouses/child's information on file - one of the reasons for this is identification purposes.

Yes... and having your name and address on fice is a -necessary- part of voting - to make sure you are voting where you are supposed to be voting, and that you only vote once. The right to vote cannot be meaningfully exercised without this.
What part of the goverment having your name on record is a -necessary- part of the right to arm?

Everything has a record-system. It's silly to suggest that any and all record systems are unconstitutional.

Just as it is silly to suggest that they are all constitutional.

 

[Goobieman]

And those who need guns to protect themselves from imaginary threats need head work.

Anyone that belives his life is not danger at each and every moment shouln't have been allowed out of the playpen.

 

[TurtleDude]

And those who need guns to protect themselves from imaginary threats need head work.

ricksfolly

yeah governments never killed anyone ever

speaking of heads-how is all that sand working?

 

[Cold Highway]

And those who need guns to protect themselves from imaginary threats need head work.

ricksfolly

Really so rednecks, neo-nazis, Klansmen, ghetto thugs, and other assorted street gangs are imaginary? Your a peace of work! Some punk scumbag tried to rob me a few years back and I shot him in the leg. Then there was the three month fighting of keeping out of jail. So yea I need a gun to protect myself from threats. If you must know the SOB survived because he went down after one shot, I wish he had died.

 

[TurtleDude]

And those who need guns to protect themselves from imaginary threats need head work.

ricksfolly

NOn responsive

YOu seem to be making an ASSumption

 

[Aunt Spiker]

My point was this 'just because it's a right doesn't mean it doesn't need to be / can't be regulated or restricted'
A right doesn't = without any standards or qualifications.
It's your right to vote - but that comes with age and citizenship requirements. . .is that infringing on your right to vote?

Do you believe a felon should be allowed to own a firearm?

 

[TurtleDude]

Really so rednecks, neo-nazis, Klansmen, ghetto thugs, and other assorted street gangs are imaginary? Your a peace of work! Some punk scumbag tried to rob me a few years back and I shot him in the leg. Then there was the three month fighting of keeping out of jail. So yea I need a gun to protect myself from threats.

He appears to be a good little sheep safe in his pen and unwilling to worry about the big bad wolves since the farmer keeps him safe.

Of course until the farmer needs some wool or some mutton

 

[Goobieman]

Really so rednecks, neo-nazis, Klansmen, ghetto thugs, and other assorted street gangs are imaginary?

Well, no, they are real -- they are why we need more gun control.
Note how gun violence is always so bad that we need more gun control, but never so bad as to create a legitimate need to have a gun for protection.

 

[Cold Highway]

My point was this 'just because it's a right doesn't mean it doesn't need to be / can't be regulated or restricted'
A right doesn't = without any standards or qualifications.
It's your right to vote - but that comes with age and citizenship requirements. . .is that infringing on your right to vote?

Do you believe a felon should be allowed to own a firearm?

If said felon serves his debt to society then why the **** not?

 

[samsmart]

Do you believe a felon should be allowed to own a firearm?

Personally, I think we are far too harsh to ex-convicts than we should be, and I believe that it's such harshness that helps keeps them criminals rather than rehabilitate out of the life of crime.

 

[Goobieman]

My point was this 'just because it's a right doesn't mean it doesn't need to be / can't be regulated or restricted'

No one argues this is the case - the right can be restricted in any way that does not infringe it.
Bans on felons owning guns? No infringement.
Prohibitions againt firing a gun in the air within city limits? No infringement.
Illegal to murder someone with a gun. No infringement.

Requiring a license to own a gun? Infringement.
Requiring a gun owner to register his gun? Infringement.
Requiring a background check to buy a gun? Infringement.
A general prohibition against owning certain kinds/classes of firearms? Infringement.

 

[Goobieman]

If said felon serves his debt to society then why the **** not?

Always been on the fence on this one. Certainly, the government has the constitutional power to do this and I generally fall on the side of the prohibtion for felons.

 

[TurtleDude]

Always been on the fence on this one. Certainly, the government has the constitutional power to do this and I generally fall on the side of the prohibtion for felons.

I support restrictions on those who engaged in violent felonies

tax protestors, etc no

 

[Goobieman]

I support restrictions on those who engaged in violent felonies
tax protestors, etc no

Yeah, I kinda think the same thing. My argument is generally that the state has the power to choose to do it if it wants to; I'll leave it up to the state itself to decide if it wants to.

 

[TurtleDude]

Yeah, I kinda think the same thing. My argument is generally that the state has the power to choose to do it if it wants to; I'll leave it up to the state itself to decide if it wants to.

It should be a state issue-the federal government has no legitimate power to federally ban someone from owning a gun based on a state conviction. and most federal convictions are unconstitutional since the federal government does not have the proper power to convict people for drug offenses (which make up the majority of federal convictions)