OT- Unregistered firearms

Dastook · Post by **Dastook** » Mon May 12, 2008 6:22 am

It seems like every time I watch a TV show or watch the news, someone has been charged with carrying an â€œunregisteredâ€

Post by **Hobie** » Mon May 12, 2008 6:45 am

With regards to some instances, I think it is a convention used by ignorant reporters. However, there are likely some juridisctions where the term would be correct. I know my great-Aunt in Braintree, MA had to turn in my great-Uncle's .38 Colt DS when he died. Bought back in the '30s, it was "unregistered".

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Mon May 12, 2008 6:55 am

Ditto. In SC we don't register specific firearms for carry - or anything else. Only "registered" firearms are those bought from businesses filling out the required BATFE forms.

When I lived in Michigan over a decade ago one had to have a permit to purchase a handgun, and then had to bring the handgun to the sheriff's office after you bought it for a "safety inspection". All this was in fact was the sheriff's office writing down the serial number, thus registering you and the weapon.

I doubt any of the secretaries tasked with the job would have known a working gun from a metal toy...

brucew44guns · Post by **brucew44guns** » Mon May 12, 2008 6:58 am

I too have puzzled over that term "unregistered". The last thing I would want is to go down to the various LE agencies and start recording name and numbers and addresses. But I suppose in DC and other such places it would be understood to do those things-----OR ELSE. Makes one wonder how the first citizens who had guns at the time in a certain location, allowed the local govt to take their rights and invade their privacy. I know, it's incremental, and probably wasn't all that big of looking thing, but it grew and it got more and more invasive. Still a shame that it was allowed to get started.

Old Time Hunter · Post by **Old Time Hunter** » Mon May 12, 2008 7:03 am

It depends on what is considered 'registered'? Wouldn't filling out the 4473 or whatever that it is, be construed as 'registered'? About half of my guns have either been purchased before, or from private purchases like rummage sales and such. My guess that would be 'unregistered', but from my understanding they would be exempt anyways. Here is Wisconsin, they do not 'register' guns, there is no law stating that they be registered, yet our media almost on a daily occurance brings up "unregistered firearms".

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Mon May 12, 2008 7:10 am

It is ignorance by the media and pandering to the antis. I think it is conscious in some instances. Some of it comes directly from quotes from LE. I heard of a reporter invited to a shooting event that was told by his boss that he would lose his job if he attended. His paper has a policy of "no good gun stories".
There are a minimum of 4100 defensive uses of guns EVERY DAY and we hear of NONE in the media, but we sure hear of all the bad stuff. Versus the 27-80 gun crimes/accidents per day. Slightly skewed against guns the media is Hmmmm?

The Actor who took the gun into CA was required to register it within 60 days.

From CA.gov:

I am moving into California and I own several handguns. What are the new-resident registration requirements?
You are considered to be a personal handgun importer as defined by California law. You may bring all of your otherwise California-legal firearms with you, but you must report all of your handguns to the DOJ within 60 days as required utilizing the New Resident Handgun Ownership Report. [PDF 518 kb / 2 pg] You are not required to report rifles or shotguns. You may not bring ammunition feeding devices with a capacity greater than ten rounds, machineguns, or assault weapons into California.

(PC sections 12001(n), 12072(f)(2))

top

How do I know if my firearms need to be registered?
There is no firearm registration requirement in California except for assault weapon owners and personal handgun importers. However, you may submit a Firearm Ownership Record to the DOJ for any firearm you own. Having a Firearm Ownership Record on file with the DOJ may help in the return of your firearm if it is lost or stolen. With very few and specific exceptions, all firearm transactions must be conducted through a firearms dealer.

JimT · Post by **JimT** » Mon May 12, 2008 7:37 am

brucew44guns wrote:Makes one wonder how the first citizens who had guns at the time in a certain location, allowed the local govt to take their rights and invade their privacy.

Bruce - There are a variety of reasons why these laws get passed.

Some get passed because of selfishness and ignorance. The "oh, that law won't affect me."

A lot of the laws get passed because gun owners will not join together. They will not join the NRA (which has the funding, the organization and the clout) because they don't like the NRA, they don't think the NRA is doing the right job or whatever. So they stay out of it and criticize, rather than get involved.

They won't join CCRKBA or GOA and other pro-gun lobbying groups. They are basically useless. Only those involved can direct the action.

I see people writing asinine things about the CCW laws, how they won't get one because the Constitution says they have an unalienable right etc. etc etc.

I guess they would rather go back to just a few short years ago when hardly ANY State had decent CCW laws and no one could carry legally.

These people do not live in reality.

Laws get passed because people are slaves to their jobs and their debt. Quite honestly, if I lived in a State with oppressive gun laws, I would first work to get those changed. We did that here in Missouri. It took 10 years or so but we got CCW legislation passed. Once that was in it was a short time until we got the "permit to purchase" a handgun done away with.

But if we could not have gotten that done, and if the State was going toward more and more gun control as some States are, I WOULD HAVE LEFT THE STATE.

Too many gunowners will not or cannot do that.

Everyone has excuses as to "why" they put up with these things. All the excuses show is that it is not a priority in their life. Most will wait until the situation gets desperate. By then it is often too late.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Mon May 12, 2008 8:28 am

I'm going for the Cynical "Tin Hat" explanation.

If all the Plebes ever hear from their Prime Propagandizer/"Educator" is "it's a crime to possess an unregistered gun" then they won notice/care when the Anti's push another malum prohibitum on us and create their confiscation list.

airedaleman · Post by **airedaleman** » Mon May 12, 2008 8:36 am

I'm pressed for time right at the moment, but as soon as I can, I'll try to give a run-down on Massachusetts's draconian firearms laws. It's a state where ALL firearms are required to be registered. More later...

Modoc ED · Post by **Modoc ED** » Mon May 12, 2008 8:55 am

"Tycer" had it pretty much right for CA as far as registering handguns. When someone comes into the state and applies for a drivers license, DMV has a form for registering handguns that they bring into the state.

BruceB · Post by **BruceB** » Mon May 12, 2008 9:48 am

California has what is called "Dealer's Registry of Sale" or DROS for handguns. The same process applies with long guns except that information about the long gun is not recorded, (no make, model, or serial number) as is done with handguns. Ironically, there is no requirement for residents to register handguns they already own that did not go through the DROS process. However, it was made a felony to be illegally carrying a loaded firearm in a public place and/or a concealed firearm that is not DROS'd to you. The idea was to make it a felony if Chuie the gang-banger was caught with a gun that wasn't reported stolen. That's where Farina ran into trouble as he was carrying a loaded, concealed handgun illegally. Most likely when they ran it, there wasn't any clear owner so they upgraded to felony.

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Mon May 12, 2008 10:07 am

You're in dreamland, if you don't think the Feds have a listing of every gun YOU'VE bought through an FFL dealer & done any Federal paperwork on in your name - like NICS, etc.

Wake up, and smell the Hoppe's:

[ http://www.reason.com/news/show/27811.html ]

In part:

"a federal court just handed the FBI the right to maintain a national registry of firearm owners, even though Congress specifically outlawed any such thing. A provision of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act mandates "instant background checks" of gun buyers. Gun dealers send personal data about prospective buyers to a Justice Department data bank. Supplying the dataâ€“the customerâ€™s name, sex, race, date of birth, and state of residenceâ€“is supposed to prevent guns from being sold to convicted felons and such. Since November 1998, about 280,000 purchases out of 14 million have been rejected.

Little known is the fact that the Justice Department has allowed the FBI to keep all gun purchase records for six months after the sale. The National Rifle Association filed suit over that practice, citing language in the Brady law requiring that all information on approved gun sales be destroyed. But the NRA lost that argument in U.S. district court last year and again in July, when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit also agreed with the Justice Department.

The department says it has to keep the records around to weed out
corrupt gun dealers. Oh.

Perhaps we should turn Carnivore loose on those dealersâ€™ Internet accounts, and those of their possible straw-man buyers, and their friends and families too. Then weâ€™ll really find out what theyâ€™re up to. "

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Mon May 12, 2008 10:37 am

Hmmm, black powder firearms don't require the forms to be filled out in my state of PA. Is that so across the country? My Ruger OA and R&D cylinder allow me to shoot modern ammo and bypasses the forms. All of my Cap and Ball guns, and my 1.rst gen Col SAA, and my flintlock didn't require the forms to be filled. They are as off the radar as you can get. I'm thinking buy old!!!

brucew44guns · Post by **brucew44guns** » Mon May 12, 2008 11:09 am

I appreciate Jims response to my post. He's right, in that we gun owners have a burden to help, and support the NRA and Gun Owners all we can. I happen to like Gun Owners attitude the most, but have been an NRA member for over 25 years, and have sent mucho dinero to them, money well spent. Thank goodness for their work.

Rusty · Post by **Rusty** » Mon May 12, 2008 11:48 am

Mike,
Another thing to consider about ML arms. Say you wanted to have a sawed off shotgun. Not one with the prescribed 18" tubes and the 26" OAL limit. As long as there is no state law where you live, federal law doesn't apply. Sooooo if you wanted a sawed off with 14" barrels you wouldn't need any permits, tax stamps, or the blessings of any agency.

There was a time back in the 70's when I was a LEO in S. Fla. One time while I was working the desk for a week in our main office I bet there would be one person a day on average, come to the office after having moved there from another state that wanted to register their firearms. My standard answer was, "Sir we don't register firearms in Florida, you are free to own as many as you like." You wouldn't believe the joy on the faces of those folks as those people left the office.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Mon May 12, 2008 11:53 am

Rusty wrote:Mike,
Another thing to consider about ML arms. Say you wanted to have a sawed off shotgun. Not one with the prescribed 18" tubes and the 26" OAL limit. As long as there is no state law where you live, federal law doesn't apply. Sooooo if you wanted a sawed off with 14" barrels you wouldn't need any permits, tax stamps, or the blessings of any agency.

There was a time back in the 70's when I was a LEO in S. Fla. One time while I was working the desk for a week in our main office I bet there would be one person a day on average, come to the office after having moved there from another state that wanted to register their firearms. My standard answer was, "Sir we don't register firearms in Florida, you are free to own as many as you like." You wouldn't believe the joy on the faces of those folks as those people left the office.

BOOM!

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Mon May 12, 2008 12:30 pm

Varies according to the State & jurisdiction you live in. God bless TEXAS!

Idahoser · Post by **Idahoser** » Mon May 12, 2008 1:14 pm

Even if you take the Brady Bunch at their word...

If your purpose is to make sure I'm allowed to buy a gun, what do you need the serial number of the gun for?

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Mon May 12, 2008 7:17 pm

OI, very nice. Was that customized by you? refresh my memory on that one.

Andrew · Post by **Andrew** » Mon May 12, 2008 8:18 pm

Everything I have bought has been documented by the shop that did the transfer. Does he take that info and "register" my guns with it? If so, then all but two of mine are registered.

WinM71 · Post by **WinM71** » Mon May 12, 2008 8:24 pm

The expression has some meaning in New York state, where I grew up. You couldn't own a handgun without a CCW permit, and each handgun was individually listed on the permit itself. Before you could buy a new handgun, you had to get the make/model/serial no. from the dealer & go to the county seat & register it, have it added to your CCW permit, and pick up a "purchase permit", which you then gave to the dealer before you could take possession of the handgun. That was quite a few years ago & I don't know what may have changed, but it is an example of a place where it was illegal to be in possession of an unregistered weapon. That is, even if you had a CCW permit, having possession of a handgun was illegal unless it was listed on the permit (i.e., "registered" with the county). Dealers would not even let you examine a handgun unless you could show them your CCW permit.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Mon May 12, 2008 8:37 pm

rjohns94 wrote:OI, very nice. Was that customized by you? refresh my memory on that one.

Back in the day when I had a couple of sheckles to rub together, it was built specifically for me (to spec) from a Navy Arms 12ga parts...

Sounds like a 80mm mortar when a 1oz slug pops out over 80gr BP...

PLANK!

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Mon May 12, 2008 9:17 pm

rjohns94 wrote:Hmmm, black powder firearms don't require the forms to be filled out in my state of PA. Is that so across the country? My Ruger OA and R&D cylinder allow me to shoot modern ammo and bypasses the forms. All of my Cap and Ball guns, and my 1.rst gen Col SAA, and my flintlock didn't require the forms to be filled. They are as off the radar as you can get. I'm thinking buy old!!!

Not to burst your bubble, but as of the above post, they are 'ON the radar' now...

We all need to pressure legislators and community leaders and businesspeople (and doctors, for instance!) to NOT just be passively 'pro-gun' but aggressively and actively pro-gun. If they aren't they don't deserve your support or your business.

If we get the laws restored to their original intent, where they focus on criminals instead of peacably armed honest citizens, we will have much less to worry about. On the other hand, if we just gripe among ourselves, the endpoint WILL be a police-state, and it won't matter what kind of 'off the radar' gun you have.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Mon May 12, 2008 9:18 pm

JimT wrote:
brucew44guns wrote:Makes one wonder how the first citizens who had guns at the time in a certain location, allowed the local govt to take their rights and invade their privacy.
Bruce - There are a variety of reasons why these laws get passed.

Some get passed because of selfishness and ignorance. The "oh, that law won't affect me."

A lot of the laws get passed because gun owners will not join together. They will not join the NRA (which has the funding, the organization and the clout) because they don't like the NRA, they don't think the NRA is doing the right job or whatever. So they stay out of it and criticize, rather than get involved.

They won't join CCRKBA or GOA and other pro-gun lobbying groups. They are basically useless. Only those involved can direct the action.

I see people writing asinine things about the CCW laws, how they won't get one because the Constitution says they have an unalienable right etc. etc etc.

I guess they would rather go back to just a few short years ago when hardly ANY State had decent CCW laws and no one could carry legally.

These people do not live in reality.

Laws get passed because people are slaves to their jobs and their debt. Quite honestly, if I lived in a State with oppressive gun laws, I would first work to get those changed. We did that here in Missouri. It took 10 years or so but we got CCW legislation passed. Once that was in it was a short time until we got the "permit to purchase" a handgun done away with.

But if we could not have gotten that done, and if the State was going toward more and more gun control as some States are, I WOULD HAVE LEFT THE STATE.

Too many gunowners will not or cannot do that.

Everyone has excuses as to "why" they put up with these things. All the excuses show is that it is not a priority in their life. Most will wait until the situation gets desperate. By then it is often too late.

This gets MY vote for "best political post I've seen in a long time..."

Gun owners had best get on the same page, and get politically active NOW, and not just by sending five bucks to the NRA, but by sending as much as you spend on your last gun, or send it to GOA, or spend time writing LOTS of letters to newspapers and legislators, or teaching non-gun types about guns, gun history, or doing something USEFUL. You can't just "head to the hills" and keep a nation free. It makes for romantic movie plots and campfire novels, but it isn't reality.

cas · Post by **cas** » Mon May 12, 2008 9:33 pm

Handguns have been registered in my state for the last 97 years.

(thankfully we are crime free because of it.)

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Mon May 12, 2008 9:46 pm

[quote]Not to burst your bubble, but as of the above post, they are 'ON the radar' now...

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be dense but what post indicates they are on the radar? No forms are filled out for BP purchases and no FFL dealer is needed to purchase them. I am just not sure what I have missed here? I understand our need to fight every battle that the anti's send our way. I just don't see which post you are referring to. Thanks

HORACE · Post by **HORACE** » Mon May 12, 2008 10:22 pm

In Oz we have to apply for a "Permit to Acquire" a firearm. Takes about 6 weeks to get back from the central Firearms Registry

. You are then free to go to your dealer and purchase your firearm of the type specified in the permit (which must coincide with the category of firearms you are licensed for)
I live in NSW, bur all states have enacted similar legislation to the above system.
This was not always the case. Prior to 1996 ( and before the so called Port Arthur massacre in Tasmania) regulations, at least for longarms, were much more sensible and less restrictive. Now for example no one can own a semi auto weapon of any kind (except in rare circumstances) I was particularly affected by this as I had a lovely Remington 1100 I used for skeet which I had to hand in (amongst many other firearms).
You Yanks would do well to guard your 2nd Amendment rights jealously

Nate Kiowa Jones · Post by **Nate Kiowa Jones** » Mon May 12, 2008 11:29 pm

Andrew wrote:Everything I have bought has been documented by the shop that did the transfer. Does he take that info and "register" my guns with it? If so, then all but two of mine are registered.

In Texas the answer is No. I am an FFL dealer and when the 4473 paperwork is completed, it stays in my possession. I do not send it in, that includes the NICs check. When I call the NICs in they only have the name of the buyer and the type of firearm, long gun or handgun. They donâ€™t get the serial # or the brand or model. If you are a Texas resident with a Conceal carry license I donâ€™t even have to call it in.
The only way for LE to find out if a gun is registered to a particular person is to do a reverse trace. This involves contacting the maker to find out what wholesaler got it then contact that wholesaler to see what FFL received it them contact the FFL to see who he sold it to. If you bought a used gun from an FFL dealer there is a good chance it wonâ€™t be reverse traceable.

CowboyTutt · Post by **CowboyTutt** » Mon May 12, 2008 11:55 pm

Steve, that was a really good post, and thanks for sharing it.

-Tutt

pullnshoot25 · Post by **pullnshoot25** » Tue May 13, 2008 3:00 am

Nate Kiowa Jones wrote:
Andrew wrote:Everything I have bought has been documented by the shop that did the transfer. Does he take that info and "register" my guns with it? If so, then all but two of mine are registered.
In Texas the answer is No. I am an FFL dealer and when the 4473 paperwork is completed, it stays in my possession. I do not send it in, that includes the NICs check. When I call the NICs in they only have the name of the buyer and the type of firearm, long gun or handgun. They donâ€™t get the serial # or the brand or model. If you are a Texas resident with a Conceal carry license I donâ€™t even have to call it in.
The only way for LE to find out if a gun is registered to a particular person is to do a reverse trace. This involves contacting the maker to find out what wholesaler got it then contact that wholesaler to see what FFL received it them contact the FFL to see who he sold it to. If you bought a used gun from an FFL dealer there is a good chance it wonâ€™t be reverse traceable.

RAD.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Tue May 13, 2008 6:54 am

rjohns94 wrote:
Not to burst your bubble, but as of the above post, they are 'ON the radar' now...

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be dense but what post indicates they are on the radar? No forms are filled out for BP purchases and no FFL dealer is needed to purchase them. I am just not sure what I have missed here? I understand our need to fight every battle that the anti's send our way. I just don't see which post you are referring to. Thanks

I was just referring to the concept that once anything is on the internet, it is essentially "public" knowledge and therefore "government" knowledge.
One would hope the government has better things to do with their time and resources than lurk on forums discussing mostly guns with patents over 100 years old, but that may be a generous leap of faith.

Old Ironsights · Post by **Old Ironsights** » Tue May 13, 2008 8:11 am

rjohns94 wrote:
Not to burst your bubble, but as of the above post, they are 'ON the radar' now...

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be dense but what post indicates they are on the radar? No forms are filled out for BP purchases and no FFL dealer is needed to purchase them. I am just not sure what I have missed here? I understand our need to fight every battle that the anti's send our way. I just don't see which post you are referring to. Thanks

IMO, "On the Radar" means that for a Conversion Cylinder to be able to be sold as an "accessory" the BATFE is well aware that it can and probably IS being used as a way around the 4473... and therefore around their beloved GCA.

As such, it is likely only a matter of time and some moron using a Conversion Cylinder in a crime before C&B revolvers, and maybe all Muzzies, fall under the GCA and require a 4473.

Dastook · Post by **Dastook** » Tue May 13, 2008 8:13 am

AJMD429 wrote:
JimT wrote:
brucew44guns wrote:Makes one wonder how the first citizens who had guns at the time in a certain location, allowed the local govt to take their rights and invade their privacy.
Bruce - There are a variety of reasons why these laws get passed.

Some get passed because of selfishness and ignorance. The "oh, that law won't affect me."

A lot of the laws get passed because gun owners will not join together. They will not join the NRA (which has the funding, the organization and the clout) because they don't like the NRA, they don't think the NRA is doing the right job or whatever. So they stay out of it and criticize, rather than get involved.

They won't join CCRKBA or GOA and other pro-gun lobbying groups. They are basically useless. Only those involved can direct the action.

I see people writing asinine things about the CCW laws, how they won't get one because the Constitution says they have an unalienable right etc. etc etc.

I guess they would rather go back to just a few short years ago when hardly ANY State had decent CCW laws and no one could carry legally.

These people do not live in reality.

Laws get passed because people are slaves to their jobs and their debt. Quite honestly, if I lived in a State with oppressive gun laws, I would first work to get those changed. We did that here in Missouri. It took 10 years or so but we got CCW legislation passed. Once that was in it was a short time until we got the "permit to purchase" a handgun done away with.

But if we could not have gotten that done, and if the State was going toward more and more gun control as some States are, I WOULD HAVE LEFT THE STATE.

Too many gunowners will not or cannot do that.

Everyone has excuses as to "why" they put up with these things. All the excuses show is that it is not a priority in their life. Most will wait until the situation gets desperate. By then it is often too late.
This gets MY vote for "best political post I've seen in a long time..."

Gun owners had best get on the same page, and get politically active NOW, and not just by sending five bucks to the NRA, but by sending as much as you spend on your last gun, or send it to GOA, or spend time writing LOTS of letters to newspapers and legislators, or teaching non-gun types about guns, gun history, or doing something USEFUL. You can't just "head to the hills" and keep a nation free. It makes for romantic movie plots and campfire novels, but it isn't reality.

++1

Hillbilly · Post by **Hillbilly** » Tue May 13, 2008 9:39 am

I figure the goverment doesnt know half of what it thinks it does about the gun sales they record.

about a year and a half ago we transfered my sons brace of handguns into his name in Michigan. I had purchased several pistols for him over the years, he was over 18 so we went to the sherriffs office.

I had Michigan Inspection cards in hand for 4 pistols. I filled out the transfer cards while the Deputy ran the guns for theft or warrants.

Out of 4 , 2 came back as not in my name, on the state database.... I had one of those for over 3 years at the time.

She told us that guns didnt show up all the time like that... did the new green cards in sonny's name and sent us on our way.

Gun registration (or whatever your state calls it's program) is bound to have errors. It's a government program if ya know what I mean.

I moved to Oklahoma...they dont care what I own or buy as long as I have a local adress if I make a purchase here.

Jeff

Hillbilly · Post by **Hillbilly** » Tue May 13, 2008 9:52 am

I have to deal with a convicted felon in Michigan who posesses at least two handguns have never been recorded in Michigan.

The police have been notified of this. The felon has drawn one of the pistols on a minor relative . This assault was investigated, Bay County would not take the gun or make a charge... they said they could not prove the felon owned the gun.

My sources tell me this felon packs (the fanny pack holster is a dead giveaway) and carries when he travels.

Did I mentions the guns were adressed when we got a Protective order?
The judge did not disarm this felon... he wrote a weak order that the felon should have the guns placed off of his property.... now mind this... that was the 3rd judge who has knowlege of the illegal guns the felon admits to posessing and none of those courts have ordered him disarmed.

Long story short... the courts cant find theire butts with the lights on and whith 2 hands... If they cant disarm a felon who admits posession I dont figure they will take many of our guns.... they just dont know who really has them

morgan in nm · Post by **morgan in nm** » Tue May 13, 2008 10:37 am

IMO, Jim is exactly right. My father has said many times that there are at least 80 million gun owners in this country not including those individuals who do not own guns but completely support the second amendment. These numbers have always been larger than the total number of votes cast legally or not. Because of this, how could there possibly be any restrictive firearms laws.
The Answer: Sadly, we are either unable or unwilling to unite. Sometimes I have read some of these posts and find that in my opinion, some people don't seem to get along with eachother on the computer which makes me wonder if they would face to face. I live in NM and I see a lot of folks moving here from other states for various reasons but one of the most common responses is because they were tired of the restrictions in the state from which they came from. They are not alone in their thinking and could probably change things where they were if they could unite.

As a side note, my local gun shop keeps the 4473's from every sale since they were mandated and I know of one incident where he retrieved one for the LEO's that was over 25 years old. I think they are supposed to dispose of them after so many years but I may be wrong. The point I am getting at is that it would be possible through dealers to gather the information to register many firearms but I don't see the Feds approaching registration that way without many of the dealers in an uproar.

scr83jp · Post by **scr83jp** » Tue May 13, 2008 10:59 am

Don't ever allow anyone to swipe your Drivers License thru their reader because it has sensitive information :SS#,CCW,medical info,blood type,etc., that bar owners,travel agents,car rental agencies,etc., don't need to know.Then after they get your printout with your vital personal info you have no control who they will release it to.like criminal friends or for Identity Theft,your home gets burglarized for your firearms,etc.

rjohns94 · Post by **rjohns94** » Tue May 13, 2008 11:34 am

I can see the points you are making. A convicted felon is not allowed to go through the gun buying process. The cap and ball is a way to bypass some of the laws (still not legel to own) that would put a pistol or rifle in his hands. Once the Gov't decides to put the cap and ball and 100 year old guns "on the radar", how do you see them trying to go back and figure out where all those millions that were sold are? and how will they force us to produce them for inspection? I can envision several ways that may happen, maybe even plausable ways but would love to hear your thoughts. Until that happens, the currently owned black powder guns, and conversion cylinders and old firearms we all love so much, are relegated to under the radar status in my eyes. We must fight at every point of attack to fight back the onslaught of our rights and freedoms.

Was watching on the news last evening how PA is trying to do a smoking ban in all public places including outside parks and they said on the news that even smokers want this. What a CROCK!!!! I am amazed at how easily we are willing to give away our freedoms, and how large a role the media plays in conditioning the unaware to do so.

OT- Unregistered firearms

OT- Unregistered firearms

LEO wont do the job all the time