In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Waiting periods
schulte
Member Posts: 6 ✭✭
I live in Connecticut where the gun laws stipulate that you must wait 14 days before buyin a gun. [:(!] This means that if you want buy a gun that has to be ordered, you not only have to go to the store, order the gun, wair for the gun to come in, you also have to go there WHEN IT COMES IN, NOT TAKE IT HOME, fill out MORE paperwork, and wait and ADDITIONAL 14 days.......regardless of whether or not it took 10 moths for the gun to come in.[:(!] [V][V]
Dont these laws suck or what?[xx(] They're just an attempt to stop the sale of guns by makeing it SO inconvenient and SO hard and SO comlex to buy a gun. [V]The only way around it is to have a permit, for which I applied but will not recieve for 90+ days.
Dont these laws suck or what?[xx(] They're just an attempt to stop the sale of guns by makeing it SO inconvenient and SO hard and SO comlex to buy a gun. [V]The only way around it is to have a permit, for which I applied but will not recieve for 90+ days.
Comments
No waiting here. Take it home the same day.
The gene pool needs chlorine.
No waiting period, pistola's are shipped overnight express. Even here in Californistan I can get a firearm overnight....Well until some politician reads this post and passes another law.....
American's Right to bear arm's is the only reason we're here today.
Hey, while I got you on the line, can you reveal your last name? On one of your posts you mentioned that your military commander almost got you into trouble because of your last name and I am just curious what that last name is.
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
Death to Tyrants!!! Lev 26:14-39
Those who would offer any interpretation that would relegate Amendment II to "relic" status of a bygone era are blatantly stating that the remainder of the Bill of Rights isn't worth a damn, either.
Luke 22:36.
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
I may get bashed for this but.....I dont mind tough gun laws i think it does prevent some people that dont need a gun from getting one.How ever you are right about criminals buying guns off the street.Just y thoughts.
And just who are WE to decide who does and DOES NOT need one?????????The constitution says NOTHING about NEED.....Geez!!!!!![:(!]
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
Tough gun laws have made myself unable to possess a semi-automatic rifle with more than a ten round magazine while living in the State of Californistan.....
I'm a U.S. military member that isn't even a California resident.
That's Homeland Defense Baby...
Makes it kind of hard to defend California or the country doesn't it?
American's Right to bear arm's is the only reason we're here today.
Here's a real original idea for you: How'sabout we punish the INDIVIDUALS who commit firearms offenses, rather than continuously slipping on new and tighter leashes on the law-abiding citizens who don't? It seems to me to be much closer to the spirit of what the Founding Fathers intended for our country that we should take away the rights of the guilty individual who commits the crime, rather than take away the liberties of a whole GROUP of people solely because of the actions of an individual or comparatively tiny handful of individuals. It also seems so common-sense that you'd think the people (and I use the word "people" here very charitably) in Government would say: "Why, that's obviously the way we should do it."
But they don't.
And why not, you ask?
Simple.
The Government, as it is currently constituted, is populated by a body of legislators of a Socialist bent who think that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are merely gigantic typos; self-appointed social engineers who just KNOW that they know what's best for you and me, whether you and I want it or not. I've said it elsewhere on this forum, and I'll say it again: The key error in thinking about why these people pass the laws they do lies in assuming that they want to GOVERN. To "govern" would mean that they themselves would be subject to restrictions in their actions; the sad fact is, rather than 'govern', they act as though they want to RULE. To rule effectively, you have to disarm the peasants. So, you need to slowly, carefully blot out that pesky Second Amendment, being sure you disguise what your true intent is by using emotional buzz-phrases like "it's for safety" and "it's for the children" and "it's for the prevention of crime" and "it's not restriction, it's regulation."
It's bullcrap, is what it TRULY is. They only hope the well-intentioned starry-eyed dopes in the general populace will just buy into the emotional feel-good component of their bilge, and not see past the smoke and mirrors to what they're REALLY doing---trying to make the U.S. into a Socialist clone of Europe, where Big Government is the boss and you're the monkey on the stick that jumps when they pull the string.
After all, NOBODY here needs to own a gun, do they? Of course not. We have ever-vigilant, omnipresent police who are perfect and never fail to get their man---or woman. Our court systems are flawless, meting out the harshest possible penalties for criminal behavior, which never fail to humble and reform every malefactor into an upright citizen upon their release. A gun? What for? To protect yourself from what, pray tell? And why would you need to target-shoot or hunt? Don't you know target-shooting bespeaks a violent and cruel nature, and hunting is a barbaric pasttime which disrespects our animal bretheren? Shame on you.
I apologize for the rant, but I'm SO sick and tired of having to beg Caesar's permission to get a sword, then have Caesar tell me how and when I can carry and unsheath the damned thing, that I have to let off a little steam now and then....And it REALLY bugs me when people come along and say things like "Gee whiz, I don't see what the fuss is about---it's for safety...or crime reduction...or for the children."
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
No?[:D][:D]
American's Right to bear arm's is the only reason we're here today.
And I am not about to listen to the liberal limp-wristed pantywaists about giving up my guns "for the children". Until they show more respect for the unborn, their argument falls upon deaf ears, here, as all disingenuous arguments do.
Nor will I listen to aristocratic Senators who want us beating our swords into plowshares, but are not themselves willing to do the same, right Senator Swinestein???
Nor am I willing to listen to Sozialistic LEO's who do not believe I should have a gun until I have "justifiable need". Translation: "We tell you what you can have, and for what ever purpose you can have them for. If our answer is "nothing" and "never", it is your job to obey." (Insert gunphreak flipping the bird at these vile b@$t@rds.)
Death to Tyrants!!! Lev 26:14-39
Those who would offer any interpretation that would relegate Amendment II to "relic" status of a bygone era are blatantly stating that the remainder of the Bill of Rights isn't worth a damn, either.
Luke 22:36.
Where is it written in the Constitution that anyone has the right to own a gun?
Second Amendment.
(Ding! Ding! Ding!)
Where is it written in the Constitution that everyone has a right to an abortion?
Ummmm.......Errrr......Wait, lemme think here a moment.....Is it the Eleventy-Twelfth Amendment?
(Bzzzzt!)
No?
Is it.....Pi over the square root of 2?
(Bzzzzt!)
Awwww, p'shaw!
My friends, it is important to fully appreciate the point Gunphreak has raised here; the people who say they want to take firearms out of the hands of the citizens for "safety's sake" and "for the children" really DON'T CARE about safety (unless it's their own, as the Ruling Elite), and they SURE as heck don't care about "the children". They just don't like the idea of bush-monkeys like us being able to defend ourselves from their enlightened rule, if push ever came to shove. "It's for the children"? And this squares with their unwavering support for abortion "rights" HOW, exactly?
Thank you, thank you, Gunphreak. You done made my day, boy!
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
That's another issue entirely, and I believe that statements such as yours which apply a fallacy-laden sort of logic only serve to perpetuate the idea that gun-owners are narrow-minded and ignorant. Bear in mind that I'm attacking the statement and not you personally; if you would like to do some reading as to how exactly the idea of abortion and the idea of compassion for children can co-exist I suggest you read Singer's essays concerning abortion.
Typos and profanity, oh my! http://www.funky-town.org
from the little I've gathered from people sending me email saying "Singer says this and Singer says that", I would not enjoy that read, as only very liberal people that I know seem to be reading and quoting it. Anyway, we are totally off the subject now, and I apologize for that, but I could not in good conscience, let it pass.
As far as waiting periods, convince all the female victims of rape and murder (little late for those) that were "waiting" for the ability to defend themselves, that waiting periods are ok. But to sum up the issue, completely unconstitutional, enough said.
Children? What children? Surely you're not talking about the tissue that can hardly qualify as a sentient life form.
But enough of that; the abortion argument is one that can be had in another thread at another time. The point is that your self-absorbed notions of a 'god-fearing nation' are part of the problem rather than the solution. Your 'god's eyes' don't have a thing to do with reality and only serve to color you as an irrational eccentric at best and as an intolerant fanatic at worst.
You can't argue the case of the 2nd amendment, and in this particular regard the issue of waiting periods, and then hold up your personal notions of right and wrong with only "because god says so" as your backing. To argue one thing with logic and reason and another with your personal belief system is not only inconsistent by hypocritical.
Typos and profanity, oh my! http://www.funky-town.org
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
1. All men are created equal. In that one statement is the basis that we.. all of us, are first of all, created, just like unborns, and we are all equal, and I dare say, from the minute they are created are equal. Therefore, we all deserve equal protection from the law.
2. The rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness should exist for all of us (obvious enough to most of us, but not sozialist engineers and liberal idiots). This is the cornerstone of this country, and some of the first words put into print in the infancy of our nation.
3. There is no God-granted right (and there never will be) nor a constitutional right to kill anyone without cause or justification. This should include those that fall under equal protect of the law, including unborns. (Surprisingly, many of the same pro-infanticide movement are declared opposers of the Death Penalty. Kill the innocent, spare the guilty. Sick!!!)
4. Amendment 9 reads, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Let's break this down a bit. "The enumeration in the Constitution" or "The things listed in the Constitution" and keep in mind, not a single right is observed in it (because, by definition, rights are for people, powers are for all levels of government), only powers granted by the people are listed. "Of certain rights", or any of them that could have meanings implied against it by some enumeration in the Constitution (2nd and 4th Amendment comes to mind here). "Shall not be construed (interpreted) to deny (withhold completely) or disparage (restrict) other(rights) retained (held) by the people (including the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of the unborn).
4. The perceived "right" of a mother to kill her unborn should not outweigh the clearly stated right of the unborn to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
Does it really bother me that some may find me narrow or close-minded? Absolutely not!! Why, because I don't need others telling me right from wrong. I already know. A fanatic? Nope. Perhaps with no basis, I may find myself asking questions of "why?" or "what am I doing?", but I find myself no less fanatical than my opponents who wish me to squander my birth rights or have them forced from me. I take comfort from the fact that the media attempts to lionize themselves by demonizing their foes on all angles, but my allies are more numerous than I may realize. To me, "Politically Correct" is always actually "politically corrupt". I am not about to turn away now. I would lose total credibility as a human being, and as an American Citizen, as well as, most importantly, a Christian, if I did. The Founders made it easy for me to hold arguments against the godless, simply because they framed the Constitution using Biblical Scripture (as much as the media and governement have tried to censor this tidbit of truth out, the fact of the matter remains, and shall always remain) as their moral basis for all inherent rights and selection of methods.
Death to Tyrants!!! Lev 26:14-39
Those who would offer any interpretation that would relegate Amendment II to "relic" status of a bygone era are blatantly stating that the remainder of the Bill of Rights isn't worth a damn, either.
Luke 22:36.
What is in question here is the definition of 'human life', and I'm guessing based on what I've read that you, gunphreak, and you, jpwolf, are indicating that reconizeable human life begins at the zygote. I strongly disagree with your definition, but I doubt very seriously that I could forumulate an effective argument, especially limited as we are to this message forum.
As for the founding fathers; for every pro-christian religious connection you can make there is likely an anti-religion/anti-church sentiment attributed to the same individual or one of this peers. However, I dare say, that you would have a very hard time substantiating your statement concerning the use of scriptures as quote:their moral basis for all inherent rights and selection of methods.
Typos and profanity, oh my! http://www.funky-town.org
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
I am happy for anyone who believes in any good and peaceable religion. We're all looking for and in need of something to lean on to get us through this life. But regardless of what may have gone before, I DON'T want government, courts or laws based solely on ANY religion or religious beliefs. Because once you get that concept in place what if the face of America changes radically (it could happen with enough time) and we would find ourselves struggling under a Koranimal type of Government (Muslim)?
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
Geez fox,just how can you get there?I mean this country was founded that way,the declaration written that way,and yes the constitution as well....it worked allready for a VERY LONG time.The changes everyone seems to be complaining about seem to have all started in earnest when we started changing the building blocks of our gov't .by pulling Religion or shouls I say faith OUT of Gov't.If you love the founders and their principals,and I believe you do...it seems that you might be more open to this line of reasoning.I mwean after all the faith was intertwined with EVERY facet of their lives,and YES within the gov't ,the justice system and all.I guess they were wrong? Where doe sthat leave us on gun rights etc.?No offense intended at all...None,just my 2 cents,and you knew it was coning anyhow...L.H.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."
-- James Madison
"Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man"
-- Thomas Jefferson
You can argue almost any side with quotations, but I must respectfully challenge your assertions Longhunter. Most of the evidence I have encountered in my own readings would indicate that the Greeks had far more influence than any biblical text.
Typos and profanity, oh my! http://www.funky-town.org
When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions.
I know that the Lord is always on the side of the RIGHT.but it is my constant anxiety and prayer that I and THIS NATION should be on the LORD'S side. ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
I have lived sir,a LONG time,and the longer I live,the more convincing PROOFS I see of this truth-THAT GOD GOVERNS IN THE AFFAIRS OF MEN. Benjamin Franklin
Men must be GOVERNED by GOD,or they will be RULED by tyrants.
William Penn