Started By
Message
0
Posted on 9/24/15 at 7:31 pm to Alahunter
quote:
... feared the new regulations would mean the end of the shop over requirements to hand over personal information to include names, addresses and birth dates to city officials in conjunction with gun and ammo sales
You also give your name and address when you buy a car at an auto dealership, and they turn the info over to the state govt. when you get your tags and license plate. It's no big deal when you're buying a car, why is it a big deal when you're purchasing a potentially lethal weapon?
Posted on 9/24/15 at 7:34 pm to Mars duMorgue
quote:
You also give your name and address when you buy a car at an auto dealership, and they turn the info over to the state govt. when you get your tags and license plate. It's no big deal when you're buying a car, why is it a big deal when you're purchasing a potentially lethal weapon?
Hell, if you apply for a bank account or a credit card, they give the information to the Feds.
Posted on 9/24/15 at 7:36 pm to CatFan81
They already have to get the same information for the background check anyway. And what gun shop doesnt have cameras watching already. The only thing new AT ALL is sending that information weekly (as simple as an accounting export, takes less than a minute) and retaining the video 5 years. A few grand in storage upgrades, if they want to be thorough, less if not.
But I'm sure thats why they are closing up and not because they are trying to sell guns to people who mostly dont want them.
But I'm sure thats why they are closing up and not because they are trying to sell guns to people who mostly dont want them.
Posted on 9/24/15 at 8:06 pm to Mars duMorgue
Owning a car is not a Contitutional Right that shall not be infringed.
Suppose your local government made you register your social media accounts. Then monitored and screened your musing for possible infractions of social "norms". I guess you'd be ok with that?
Suppose your local government made you register your social media accounts. Then monitored and screened your musing for possible infractions of social "norms". I guess you'd be ok with that?
Posted on 9/24/15 at 8:07 pm to five_fivesix
quote:
Owning a car is not a Contitutional Right that shall not be infringed.
Suppose your local government made you register your social media accounts. Then monitored and screened your musing for possible infractions of social "norms". I guess you'd be ok with that?
They're not saying that San Franciscans can't own guns. THAT would be a violation of their Constitutional rights.
Posted on 9/24/15 at 8:10 pm to Russvegas Dan
quote:"regulate" is another word for "infringe".
Sometimes local governments regulate things. Are you against local government?
Posted on 9/24/15 at 8:10 pm to five_fivesix
What right is taken? Jesus, some of y'all are worse than the very SJW's you rail against.
Posted on 9/24/15 at 8:31 pm to Alahunter
Posted on 9/24/15 at 8:43 pm to Montezuma
quote:
What right is taken? Jesus, some of y'all are worse than the very SJW's you rail against.
What is your experience with firearms?
Posted on 9/24/15 at 8:47 pm to Tropic Lightning
quote:
What is your experience with firearms?
I agree with him. Why don't you ask me what my experience with firearms is.
Posted on 9/24/15 at 8:52 pm to CatFan81
Okay, what is your experience?
Posted on 9/24/15 at 9:00 pm to Tropic Lightning
4 years in the Army.
I don't have a problem with what they are doing because that's what the vast majority of their population wants. If it were in an area where the vast majority of the population were against it, I wouldn't be in favor of it.
What they're doing isn't infringing on any rights. They aren't saying that the citizens of San Francisco can't own firearms. You can always go outside of the city to get them.
I don't have a problem with what they are doing because that's what the vast majority of their population wants. If it were in an area where the vast majority of the population were against it, I wouldn't be in favor of it.
What they're doing isn't infringing on any rights. They aren't saying that the citizens of San Francisco can't own firearms. You can always go outside of the city to get them.
This post was edited on 9/25/15 at 8:44 am
Posted on 9/24/15 at 9:03 pm to CatFan81
For everyone that is defending the mayor and what he's done... you're defending a policy that violates Federal law.
So, congrats on defending an illegal action and not knowing what you're talking about.
quote:
No such rule or regulation prescribed [by the Attorney General] after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary's authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.
So, congrats on defending an illegal action and not knowing what you're talking about.
Posted on 9/24/15 at 9:05 pm to Alahunter
I don't care what they do. I don't live in San Francisco. I did live in Cali for like 6 months. I guarantee you that the vast majority of San Franciscans, including an ex of mine who lives there, has zero problem with it.
Posted on 9/24/15 at 9:06 pm to CatFan81
1. So on your premise gay marriage should be illegal then.
2. The laws are clearly infringing on people's abilities to get firearms as evident by there is not one firearms store in SF.
Research Illiinois State / Washington DC / Maryland gun laws being over turned by Federal Judges for being too restrictive.
2. The laws are clearly infringing on people's abilities to get firearms as evident by there is not one firearms store in SF.
Research Illiinois State / Washington DC / Maryland gun laws being over turned by Federal Judges for being too restrictive.
This post was edited on 9/24/15 at 9:07 pm
Posted on 9/24/15 at 9:07 pm to CatFan81
It doesn't matter what the vast majority of idiots want. It's a violation of Federal Law.
Posted on 9/24/15 at 9:08 pm to Tropic Lightning
Yeah.. DC has been getting their asses handed to them in court lately. 
Posted on 9/24/15 at 9:09 pm to Tropic Lightning
quote:
2. The laws are clearly infringing on people's abilities to get firearms as evident by there is not one firearms store in SF.
Probably has more to do with capitalism than Gun Laws. Lack of clientele base I'd imagine. Also a lack of gun stores is not evidence of any infringing of rights.
Posted on 9/24/15 at 9:10 pm to Tropic Lightning
quote:
1. So on your premise gay marriage should be illegal then.
Gay marriage would be voted in, overwhelmingly, in San Fran... and in most major cities.
quote:
2. The laws are clearly infringing on people's abilities to get firearms as evident by there is not one firearms store in SF.
The city of San Francisco isn't that large. Go elsewhere in the Bay Area to get them. BART goes well outside of San Francisco proper.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News