Domestic Terrorists are getting Guns

The obvious question of "so what?" must be asked with regard to the above. What difference does it make? Those who cannot legally possess firearms are already acquiring them, either through theft, the black market, or having a friend purchase it for them through a straw purchase sale. What ultimate, meaningful difference would be made if these individuals could go through legal channels where the sale is documented, and the forms that must be filled out could be used against them in a court of law?

 

I personally don't know how to do this but if some other people want to do it, provided that it's legal I don't see anything wrong with it.

Is erasing the serial number off a gun legal?

 

Make me the King of my state, and it will happen starting today.

 

It's called filing off the serial number. Not difficult to do.

- - - Updated - - -

The SN is stamped into the metal, or even on some kind of plate.

It's extremely illegal, but those seeking to commit crimes with firearms are normally illegally in possession of that weapon anyway.

 

The fanatical right has been stockpiling enough weaponry for World War III, and the Rapture, and the Zombies for SO many years, along with their occasional massacres of U.S. citizens. It's good to see them whine about leftists with guns. Very good indeed.....

 

Indeed it is not. Defacing the identifying marks on a firearm, such as the serial number, is a felony offense.

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/usao-ut/legacy/2013/06/03/guncard.pdf

See section 18 USC § 922(k), (o) & (v); 26 USC § 5861 of page three, subsection G.

Between the right and the left, which group is most often responsible for using firearms for the sole purpose of orchestrating unprovoked, unjustified violence against others?

 

Why is it a felony offense? The government has no business being able to track which gun is in which person's hand. It's not like we are talking about enriched uranium. It just sounds the government is being meddlesome and intrusive (again!)

 

Without a national registry being in place, cataloging every single firearm in existence, and every transaction through which it goes, the serial number can only identify the last known legal owner. In most states, where there is no background check requirement for private sales, this is the first person who initially purchased the firearm from a federally licensed firearms dealer. Afterwards it can trade hands any number of times, from dozens to hundreds, rendering all efforts at identifying the current legal owner as both useless and physically impossible.

 

You forgot all the talk about a :Second Amendment solution if the election didn't go your way?

Such short and subjective memories you have

 

But wait, isn't it your ilk that wants guns to be available for all, no background checks or limits whatsoever? Because doing so would trample on your cherished 2nd Amendment rights? Or have you suddenly changed your mind on gun laws?

I don't support the violent acts, I support the civilly disobedient protests, unless you want to disregard the First Amendment as well. A general consensus can be that Trump is a revolting being, a spoiled brat from the day he was born, if his heart called it quits, I doubt many would miss him.

 

Cite the above quote, who made it, and where it was made.

After doing such, demonstrate evidence of individuals who are classified as conservatives, utilizing firearms and the threat of violence over not getting their way. If all you have is talk then you have nothing.

You are ignoring what the post in reference is about. It is not about utilizing firearms in defense of a corrupt government. The post in question cites encouragement of the use of violence and sabotage for the purpose of getting out whatever their message is. In simple, uncomplicated, easy to understand terms, they are advocating terrorism.

Protesting does not involve the destruction of private and public property, or shutting down city infrastructures, or obstructing emergency response vehicles, or even randomly assaulting individuals who voted for Donald Trump.

 

This is already illegal, it being illegal will not change.
Making it more difficult for the law abiding to buy guns does not limit criminals from doing so.

- - - Updated - - -

Who here opposes leftists who are legally able to own a gun from having one or more?

- - - Updated - - -

There was no such talk.

- - - Updated - - -

Fallacy: begging the question.
No one makes this argument.

 

No such talk? You have a short and very selective memory

 

I scanned your link and could find none of what you claim it states. It's nothing but a statement of gun rights.

 

A claim we both know you cannot support.

Please: cite "all the talk about a :Second Amendment solution if the election didn't go [our] way".

 

Nutters can easily get guns in a country swimming in over 300 million of the wretched things? Really? I'm shocked!

 

BE AFRAID. BE VERY AFRAID.

The answer, obviously, is MORE guns. They won't come to get you if you have that mini-gun installed on your porch.
The GOP is doing it's part to help by removing restrictions on the mentally deficient from getting guns.

 

You repeat your previous claim. I will repeat my answer.

You miss the point. The issue is not gun rights, the issue is that the "progressives" have changed their strategy from trying to advance their agenda through the political process and an incremental takeover of key social institutions (press, education), to one of open violence.

The Left lost political power. Rather than accept the outcome of the political process, they reject it and turn to violence. They riot in the streets, ambush and murder cops, burn buildings. Now they are advocating their members arm themselves and go to war.

Try to keep up. Its not always about your agenda.

 

You either accidentally or intentionally miss the point. Like another "progressive". I'll repeat my answer to you that I gave that other one.

You miss the point. The issue is not gun rights, the issue is that the "progressives" have changed their strategy from trying to advance their agenda through the political process and an incremental takeover of key social institutions (press, education), to one of open violence.

The Left lost political power. Rather than accept the outcome of the political process, they reject it and turn to violence. They riot in the streets, ambush and murder cops, burn buildings. Now they are advocating their members arm themselves and go to war.


If you are a "progressive" then you do support the violence. To "progressives", the ends justify the means, and violence is a perfectly acceptable route to imposing the "progressive" tyranny on the nation.

 

WHy does the link in the OP not support the claims made in that link and why has the the OP ignored the above?

 

If a person commits a felony or is judged mentally incapable of being safe with a firearm, its useful to know if he actually owns any.

 

Demonisation of people based on ideology and really not one shred of evidence - here I was thinking that the right thought all "liberals" were "snowflakes" but now it seems they are quaking in thier beds at the thought of "liberals" owning guns

So, are you advocating a civil war?

Or are you advocating that only certain sections of the American populace are allowed to own guns?

 

Because facts should not alter a good rant

To be honest this is simply the NRA (read advertising arm of the armaments industry) trying to use scare tactics to increase sales.....................again.

Over the last eight years they have had a field day because all they had to do was post "Obama will take your guns" and gun sales went up. Now they have to resort to "Liberals will kill you" to get the same effect

 

We both know you know you cannot provide an actual example of this.

Law abiding adults.
Why -- who else should be allowed?

- - - Updated - - -

Oh look - the demonisation of people based on ideology and really not one shred of evidence

 

I don't think Conservatives are "quaking in their beds" over liberals owning guns. I think they just worry (and rightly so, might I add) that liberals would use these arms to commit acts of violence.

The only ones advocating for violence and maybe a civil war are the liberals.

I believe they were just pointing out that a lot of liberals are buying guns recently because they intend to commit acts of terrorism with them.