Would you turn in a fellow gun owner for paperwork violations?

[jet57]

WTF is constitutionally legal? You seem to be confused. It may be legal it is not constitutional as even a school boy could tell you it is in breech of the constitution.

I see understanding eludes you and is replaced by beliefs. The supreme court cannot alter the constitution and is bound by the terms of the constitution as are all arms of government. Can you fault that? The supreme court is subject to the will of the people as is government. Do you get that? Who may at any time request government alter, remove or change a decision, action, direction, policy, law and enforce that decision by removal of government if required. It is the safety net the founding fathers were at pains to install and you don't know that. What is not clear to you now?

WTF do you mean the consent of the people has not changed has the slightest impact on what the people may do? Irrelevant. That power rests with the people always

Denial is what you have done. Do they not teach how the system of government works or is the function of the people left out?

(chuckle)

Dude, the 5 to 4 right-wing majority of the Supreme Court - ruled- that the 2nd is not an unlimited right. You are in denial.

Face it, you won't win this one.

 

[jimbo]

It depends though, someone worried about an economic crash with multiple guns to me isn't a problem, to some people it is. If I believed they were going to hurt someone thats a different story, but A paperwork violation like an illegal immigrant buying a gun second hand, or a felon who hasn't expunged their record but is off of probation and living a normal life or carrying illegally in a state like New Jersey or in NYC? Those are paperwork issues and I wouldn't help the police or prosecutor convict them

I'd turn in the illegal immigrant for being an illegal immigrant.

There is no Constitutional right to invade our borders.

 

[jimbo]

What if the felony was stealing a car or writing a hot check or vandalism in excess of 500 dollars? And it was 10 years ago?

Those situations still would not have anything to do with the second amendment.

 

[AGENT J]

Say you know your neighbor carries a gun without a license, or maybe was covicted of a disqualifying crime decades ago but has since been a productive member of society, or maybe decided not to register a sporting rifle like in Connecticutt,or an unregistered handgun in California? would you turn them in to authorities? Or would you testify against them in court?

I would not, if I believe the law to be wrong I would never help the government punish someone for violating it.

I can admit my own hypocrisy in this case, It would be very circumstantial . . .sometimes i would sometimes I wouldnt

 

[TurtleDude]

(chuckle)

Dude, the 5 to 4 right-wing majority of the Supreme Court - ruled- that the 2nd is not an unlimited right. You are in denial.

Face it, you won't win this one.

you apparently do not understand the concept of dicta. and yes, the 2A is not an unlimited prohibition on government action such as state action

 

[Jerry]

Say you know your neighbor carries a gun without a license, or maybe was covicted of a disqualifying crime decades ago but has since been a productive member of society, or maybe decided not to register a sporting rifle like in Connecticutt,or an unregistered handgun in California? would you turn them in to authorities? Or would you testify against them in court?

I would not, if I believe the law to be wrong I would never help the government punish someone for violating it.

I do not. I know people who are in violation right now, and I do not turn them in because the law is wrong. The requirement shouldn't exist for their to be an infraction.

 

[Crovax]

If they were breaking federal law then yes, otherwise no

 

[Jerry]

Say you know your neighbor carries a gun without a license, or maybe was covicted of a disqualifying crime decades ago but has since been a productive member of society, or maybe decided not to register a sporting rifle like in Connecticutt,or an unregistered handgun in California? would you turn them in to authorities? Or would you testify against them in court?


I would not, if I believe the law to be wrong I would never help the government punish someone for violating it.

I don't support gun control so of course I'm not going to help enforce it.

 

[Jerry]

2nd is not absolute. You can't have artillery..

Yes you can, a license for a destructive device with all the appropriate paperwork is all that's needed. All regulations must apply concerning storage, usage and transportation. Not all states in the USA allow for civilian ownership of destructive devices such as field pieces and artillery, but many do.

...and you can't be a felon looking for a firearm.

Yes you can. The fed and most states will restore a felon's gun rights after a number of years relative to the severity of the offence and the quality of lawyer you can afford.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Yes you can. The fed and most states will restore a felon's gun rights after a number of years relative to the severity of the offence and the quality of lawyer you can afford.

Note here, the feds have no process which will restore your Rights that are stripped away for felonies. States do yes. But the Feds do not.

 

[Crimefree]

(chuckle)

Dude, the 5 to 4 right-wing majority of the Supreme Court - ruled- that the 2nd is not an unlimited right. You are in denial.

Face it, you won't win this one.

There you have it beliefs trump undeniable facts every time. Dude try and refute what I have told you as fact instead of regurgitating what has been trashed by it. That makes you look like a fool. Explain how the court is a higher authority than governments employer and may flaunt the rules it has to obey and can be enforced at any time.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Say you know your neighbor carries a gun without a license, or maybe was covicted of a disqualifying crime decades ago but has since been a productive member of society, or maybe decided not to register a sporting rifle like in Connecticutt,or an unregistered handgun in California? would you turn them in to authorities? Or would you testify against them in court?

I would not, if I believe the law to be wrong I would never help the government punish someone for violating it.

Can't say that I would be sufficiently motivated to turn anyone in over technical violations of laws regarding victimless crimes w/o regard to which of those laws it was.
There's only a personal cost and no benefit to that sort of behavior.

Why do you ask?

 

[Crimefree]

Yes you can, a license for a destructive device with all the appropriate paperwork is all that's needed. All regulations must apply concerning storage, usage and transportation. Not all states in the USA allow for civilian ownership of destructive devices such as field pieces and artillery, but many do.


Yes you can. The fed and most states will restore a felon's gun rights after a number of years relative to the severity of the offence and the quality of lawyer you can afford.

Which in itself is unconstitutional since a right my not be removed. It is suspended until the sentence is complete. Where do we get the idea that if we allow government to strip rights from people we don't like ours are still protected from government?

 

[Crimefree]

you apparently do not understand the concept of dicta. and yes, the 2A is not an unlimited prohibition on government action such as state action

Man the low IQ types do not understand such abstract ideas. It is what they BELIEVE it to be and anything else is to frightening to contemplate.

The 2A is not unlimited is to them government can do as it will. Yet when asked what limitation can they suggest that does not infringe the right they have none or quote stupid court decisions which also may not infringe this right and have no power to do so. They cannot see that our rights are supreme and not the courts. Abstract, incomprehensible. No court may make an unconstitutional ruling that cannot be nullified by being unconstitutional. The rights owners have a right to do that.

 

[molten_dragon]

Say you know your neighbor carries a gun without a license, or maybe was covicted of a disqualifying crime decades ago but has since been a productive member of society, or maybe decided not to register a sporting rifle like in Connecticutt,or an unregistered handgun in California? would you turn them in to authorities? Or would you testify against them in court?

Maybe. It depends on what else I know about the person. If they're a nutjob and I think they might be dangerous, then yes, I'd make an anonymous report to the police. If they seem otherwise harmless, then no, it's not my business, nor is it my job to enforce those laws.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Can't say that I would be sufficiently motivated to turn anyone in over technical violations of laws regarding victimless crimes w/o regard to which of those laws it was.
There's only a personal cost and no benefit to that sort of behavior.

Why do you ask?

Because most people who support gun rights are conservatives who usually tend to be more law and order types.... So I am curious there

 

[jimbo]

Because most people who support gun rights are conservatives who usually tend to be more law and order types.... So I am curious there

It's not that difficult to understand. Most conservatives support the Constitution, which is the primary law of the land, and the Constitution does not support federal gun laws.

 

[MaggieD]

Say you know your neighbor carries a gun without a license, or maybe was covicted of a disqualifying crime decades ago but has since been a productive member of society, or maybe decided not to register a sporting rifle like in Connecticutt,or an unregistered handgun in California? would you turn them in to authorities? Or would you testify against them in court?

I would not, if I believe the law to be wrong I would never help the government punish someone for violating it.

I probably wouldn't go out of my way to turn in any acquaintance for breaking a law unless it involved children or I thought they were a danger to others.

 

[ashurbanipal]

For most situations, the answer would be "hell, no." Only if I was convinced that the person meant to commit a serious crime with the gun would I report it.

 

[rhinefire]

Hell no! Every armed citizen is an ally. If it was a dirty cop I would call it in immediately.

 

[jet57]

There you have it beliefs trump undeniable facts every time. Dude try and refute what I have told you as fact instead of regurgitating what has been trashed by it. That makes you look like a fool. Explain how the court is a higher authority than governments employer and may flaunt the rules it has to obey and can be enforced at any time.

The Supreme Court refuted it. The Supreme Court is around to decide what is and is not constitutional.

 

[Crimefree]

Maybe. It depends on what else I know about the person. If they're a nutjob and I think they might be dangerous, then yes, I'd make an anonymous report to the police. If they seem otherwise harmless, then no, it's not my business, nor is it my job to enforce those laws.

Good points

The gun control management are ever so happy when people start acting out of fear because it is a gun. It shows success that person is one of theirs.

How on earth does the possession of a gun turn anybody into anything? Which of us can tell who will do what but we are convinced we are better than others who we think do not deserve to own firearms. Elitism and fear are all gun control wants. If I can help it I will not help gun control in any way at all. These advocate would see me die to get their way and deserve no respect from me and I don't care if it is government which has no business making unconstitutional laws.

 

[Crimefree]

The Supreme Court refuted it. The Supreme Court is around to decide what is and is not constitutional.

Prove it. Show me the power the supreme court has to change the constitution or misinterpret it?

 

[Crimefree]

For most situations, the answer would be "hell, no." Only if I was convinced that the person meant to commit a serious crime with the gun would I report it.

What would convince you? :lol:

 

[ashurbanipal]

What would convince you?

It would depend on the situation, but it would take something big and obvious. One example would be if the person in question asked me to help them kill, say, their sister or ex-wife or something. In general, I think gun control is not a good idea. It's not good social policy. People have an intrinsic right to defend themselves, and also an intrinsic right to own more-or-less what they want (with certain exceptions). The latter right takes a back seat to the right to not be murdered or injured gratuitously.