[buggyone]

Regarding the registration of guns - this item may be pertinent.
Judge upholds DC gun registration requirements - Washington Times

It is regarding registration of guns in Washington DC and was very recent.

If it can be done in Washington DC, it can be done elsewhere in the USA.

The gun ownership I was talking about was for seniors over 80 years old and that an annual vision and skills test be given. If they pass it - fine. Same for driving. You cannot argue against that reasonably. I also said I do not expect it to happen so sarcasm is not necessary.

[ugotme]

Originally Posted by buggyone

I saw in the Daily Sun a few days ago that a Villager was cleaning his pistol and shot himself in the stomach. How can a person who has handled guns enough to own one be so careless not to check and double check that the pistol was unloaded?

How can one be so careless as to drive after having several drinks? How can one be so careless as to text while driving?

Everyone of us has been careless at sometime and escaped! Accidents happen! Although, as stated, this may not truly be the case.

I have been involved in the shooting sports for over 35 years - never had an accident and do not personally know anyone who has.

As with all things - it may have been an accident but sometimes you just can NOT fix stupid!

[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by billethkid

I strongly suspect that the person did not shoot themselves while cleaning their gun, but was/is the best tale that shields them from embarassment.....as if shooting one's self while cleaning isn't embarassing enough.

It is pretty difficult to shoot one's self while cleaning a gun....the story stinx!!!

And Carl I am sure you know that explaining anything regarding guns to anybody against guns is a waste of keystrokes.

I was going to address that next. These remarks are not about the shooting that buggyone referred to.

I have been acquainted with several law enforcement officers who have committed suicide, at least two of whom were shot with the pretext that they were cleaning their handguns at the time they were "accidentally" shot.

One case involved a revolver, the other a semi-automatic. In both cases gun cleaning materials had been laid out on the table and the hand grips removed from the guns. A normal cleaning does not involve removal of the hand grips. If a detailed cleaning is to be done, the normal barrel cleaning is done before the detailed cleaning.
Barrel cleaning requires opening the cylinder on a revolver or the opening of the slide on a semi-automatic. A loaded gun is apparent at this point.

A common motive for a suicidal person for setting up a pretext of accidentally shooting himself is that his life insurance may be invalid in case of suicide.

Another is the intent of the suicidal person to shield his family from the embarrassment of the act of suicide.

Homicide investigators are often complicit in this deception if there is no suicide note left behind. They may "know" in their heart that it is a suicide but they want to protect the reputation of the dead person and be sure that the survivors get any possible survivor benefits.

And, finally --- It is incredibly presumptions of buggyone to assume that the accidental shooting had anything to do with the AGE of the individual involved. Too OLD to own a gun is not in the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Some people persist in ignoring that pesky Second Amendment.


.

[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by buggyone

Regarding the registration of guns - this item may be pertinent.
Judge upholds DC gun registration requirements - Washington Times

It is regarding registration of guns in Washington DC and was very recent.

If it can be done in Washington DC, it can be done elsewhere in the USA.

The gun ownership I was talking about was for seniors over 80 years old and that an annual vision and skills test be given. If they pass it - fine. Same for driving. You cannot argue against that reasonably. I also said I do not expect it to happen so sarcasm is not necessary.

The ruling you reference is at the lowest court level in DC. As the article says, it will be appealed. The lower court rulings in DC regarding firearms have a history of being overturned at higher levels.

A few years ago the Supreme Court overturned a DC law that was an outright ban on owning handguns.

Well-meaning, but misguided, legislatures continue to pass unconstitutional firearms laws. It often takes years for them to work their way through the courts and get overturned.

The Second Amendment continues to be the law of the land.

.

[ilovetv]

Originally Posted by buggyone

If a driver would be "reported to the state" for being too old to drive safely, there is nothing the "state" can do as long as the person has a valid license. If a relative or friend cannot get them to voluntarily give up their license to drive, there is nothing that can be done.

Now, if there was a mandatory vision/driving skills test after 80, a license could be revoked and I feel most would abide with that revocation.

The same could be said for guns. If there was a mandatory vision/shooting skills test after 80, the gun could be kept or lost. Is this "gun control"? Yes and therefore will never happen.

About "the state can't do anything" about an unfit driver reported to the DMV:

WRONG!

See link here, "How to report an unfit driver" in FL:

Florida GrandDriver - Official Website

[buggyone]

Originally Posted by ilovetv

About "the state can't do anything" about an unfit driver reported to the DMV:

WRONG!

See link here, "How to report an unfit driver" in FL:

Florida GrandDriver - Official Website

Thank you for the information. Very interesting.

[buggyone]

Originally Posted by Carl in Tampa

The ruling you reference is at the lowest court level in DC. As the article says, it will be appealed. The lower court rulings in DC regarding firearms have a history of being overturned at higher levels.

A few years ago the Supreme Court overturned a DC law that was an outright ban on owning handguns.

Well-meaning, but misguided, legislatures continue to pass unconstitutional firearms laws. It often takes years for them to work their way through the courts and get overturned.

The Second Amendment continues to be the law of the land.

.

Until it does get overturned, it is still the law.

[red tail]

Originally Posted by buggyone

If a driver would be "reported to the state" for being too old to drive safely, there is nothing the "state" can do as long as the person has a valid license. If a relative or friend cannot get them to voluntarily give up their license to drive, there is nothing that can be done.

Now, if there was a mandatory vision/driving skills test after 80, a license could be revoked and I feel most would abide with that revocation.

The same could be said for guns. If there was a mandatory vision/shooting skills test after 80, the gun could be kept or lost. Is this "gun control"? Yes and therefore will never happen.

easy for people to say when they don't fit the criteria...just because one turns 80 doesn't put him or her in a situation that requires a complete examination for everything. I know many who are 80 plus and do not require any testing as suggested here!!!





eau

[perrjojo]

So if we took firearms away from "unfit" owners, how would we implement that and how would it be enforced? Who would go into a home and take them away? I understand the concern but be careful what you wish for.

[buggyone]

Originally Posted by perrjojo

So if we took firearms away from "unfit" owners, how would we implement that and how would it be enforced? Who would go into a home and take them away? I understand the concern but be careful what you wish for.

As I said, even though it MIGHT be a good idea, it will never happen - so no use discussing a non-issue.

It is kind of like the 80 year old who cannot pass the vision test for a driver license. The license gets revoked but the person's car does not get taken away. Very likely they will continue to drive without a license or insurance.

[CFrance]

If there is no register anywhere of gun ownership, why is it that guns can be traced to their last legal owner? That's what I was talking about, Carl.

[obxgrampy]

Why does every post that references the word "gun" seem to degenerate into a debate about about registration? I underwent a background check for each firearm I have purchased. I believe that is a sufficient safeguard and precursor for gun ownership. There is no need for anyone, including the government, to know what is secured behind the door of my safe.

[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by CFrance

If there is no register anywhere of gun ownership, why is it that guns can be traced to their last legal owner? That's what I was talking about, Carl.

Guns cannot always be traced to "their last legal owner."

I explained the tracking method earlier: The manufacturer is required to keep a record of the firearms dealer who purchased the gun and the dealer is required to keep a record of the individual to whom the gun was sold. Any further disposition of the gun that goes through a licensed firearms dealer is also recorded.

But, of course, the chain is broken if the firearm is stolen or disposed of in a private transaction.

It is entirely lawful for you to sell me a firearm if we are both residents of the same state. Since a licensed firearms dealer is not involved, you are not required to maintain a record of who you sell a firearm to in a legal private transaction.

To further complicate tracking, people move, sometimes leaving no forwarding address, and cannot be found. In the mean time, if several years have elapsed since the original retail sale, the gun may have changed hands several times in lawful transactions that the subsequent owners kept no records of.

There is no legal, constitutional, central registry of all firearms ownership.

Such a registry would be considered by many to be a method of facilitating firearms seizure at some time in the future.

.

[buggyone]

I found out something interesting regarding buying handguns in Florida. Anyone who has a DD214 (Armed Forces Discharge) can get a Concealed Carry Permit just by paying a fingerprint fee and processing fee - about $115 total. No test, no skill in firing. Figure that most of the vets in The Villages had active service over 40 years ago.

Once that permit is issued, you can go out and buy and take home a pistol that same day. No waiting period.

[Carl in Tampa]

Originally Posted by buggyone

I found out something interesting regarding buying handguns in Florida. Anyone who has a DD214 (Armed Forces Discharge) can get a Concealed Carry Permit just by paying a fingerprint fee and processing fee - about $115 total. No test, no skill in firing. Figure that most of the vets in The Villages had active service over 40 years ago.

Once that permit is issued, you can go out and buy and take home a pistol that same day. No waiting period.

The CCW license is not issued until after the fingerprints are submitted and a background check is completed. That is the purpose of obtaining the fingerprints. The DD-214 simply demonstrates that the applicant has received training in the safe handling of firearms.

There are a variety of other documents that are acceptable for demonstrating firearms safety training, including a hunter safety course. When younger I was a certified Florida Hunter Safety instructor. The course, like the DD-214, is about training in safe handling of firearms, not marksmanship.

Firearms ownership and use is the most highly regulated of all of the Second Amendment rights.

Relax.

.