Pro-gun myths busted

[CurrusDei]

One of my friends, who is 8 months pregnant, had a man try to break into her house two weeks ago. She was sitting with her 1 year old working from home and heard someone pushing on the front door trying to force it open. She got her gun and yelled at him to leave - at which point this freak peeks through the mail slot into the house at her.

The guy had to climb over a baby gate that closes off their front porch to get to the front door, so he knew there were kids in the home and he STILL tried to break in.

The guy took a while before he finally left when she pointed the pistol right between his eyes. She then called the police. Their advice? "He was on your porch, you should have shot him"

When seconds mean life or death, the police are only minutes away.

[mrsleeve]

Can someone point me to the last crime committed with a lever action 22lr,hell a leveraction in general.

[BraveUlysses]

I confirmed he was an AZ resident and had him sign a bill of sale, that is what I'm required to do. It limits my liability going forward.

Good, I'm glad you complied with the minimal requirements of the law. I'll take your statement as a no to my question and not an 'invalidation' of smooth's comments.

[ParsedOut]

A bill of sale proves that the person in question was not a criminal and not lying to you about their identity?

I confirmed he was an AZ resident and had him sign a bill of sale, that is what I'm required to do. It limits my liability going forward.

[marshallnoise]

A bill of sale proves that the person in question was not a criminal and not lying to you about their identity?

It shows that he was not the owner from a certain date forward. And that is good enough.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[BraveUlysses]

Sold it with a bill of sale, so your entire diatribe is invalid. Glad to see you though.

A bill of sale proves that the person in question was not a criminal and not lying to you about their identity?

[marshallnoise]

More over, all of that doesn't stop someone dropping a screw in life and using the gun in a murder.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[ParsedOut]

Sold it with a bill of sale, so your entire diatribe is invalid. Glad to see you though.

[smooth]

there's a law prohibiting that, right?

current law only prohibits a national registry of gun ownership. States are free to generate their own registry lists if they desire. Currently twenty-one states have some form of record of sales registration laws on the books. California, Maryland, and Massachusetts centralize all records at the state level whereas the other states leave it to local police to retain registration data.

Even in gun-law lax Arizona, where ParsedOut is exercising his "freedom" muscles to do something idiotic (I'm also similarly free to stuff an entire pack of cigarettes in my mouth and light them all at once but I wouldn't brag about doing it on an internet forum as an expression of stance against all those namby-pamby anti-smoking "cancer stick" grabbers; after all, cigs don't cause cancer, smokers do. cigarettes are just a tool, I could cause cancer with a pipe, or sucking on a tailpipe, or going out in the sun too long and we don't control those behaviors), if the gun he sold to some stranger in a parking lot is used in a crime, the feds will contact the gun's manufacturer, trace it to the FFL that sold the gun to ParsedOut, then come talk to him. They might even arrest him or take him down to the station for questioning. They could charge him with a felony and restrict his right to own firearms forever...after all, this is the crooked and untrustworthy federal government that will stop at nothing to end all lawful gun ownership by the citizenry, right? What stops them from charging him with having some part in the crime? Nothing, and the irony of the situation is there is a lot more danger of that occurring than the cops coming to his door and confiscating his weapons if he tells them he owns some...

all of which could be avoided if he simply went down to his local firearms dealer and transferred the weapon to the new buyer and left record of sale with the FFL just like he did when he purchased it initially (which he has previously stated he has absolutely no problem doing). if he did that, then he'd be immune from any kinds of actions that the buyer (and anyone downstream from the buyer) does with the weapon. When they did the trace, which they do in all criminal cases involving firearms regardless of how strict or lax gun laws are in the states these guys are living in, they'd go right past his name and have no reason to bother him or talk to him about anything at all whatsoever

It's a fiction that he's protecting himself from the prying eyes of the government. He's stated repeatedly in other threads that he's always bought guns "on the books" so he's simply setting himself up for a hassle, at a minimum. His attitude about it here indicate he's willing to do something stupid to demonstrate a point to people he doesn't like or respect--not traits I'd tend to think are desirable in a gun wielder. But those are the kinds of people sleeve, marshalnoise, et al. tends to respect. People who are willing to do something not well thought out and that tends to not even be in their own best interest long-term. That's the portrayal the most vocal gun wielding r3v members are painting of themselves. Kudos!

In any case, even if his initial purchase was made "off the books," let's say sleeve sold it to him from gun lax Montana during a meet, and then ParsedOut decided to sell it to some random dude at a parking lot (Sleeve has posted in past threads that he retains the information of the people he's sold his guns to privately. At least I think he said that and I don't know why he wouldn't because if these guys don't trust their government then why would they trust random people who may or may not follow the laws with guns they purchased in parking lots--you really shouldn't have to be a "liberal" or whatever to understand that's about as stupid as stupid gets when talking about handling a thing that can be used to kill another human being), then the feds will go to the manufacture, find out where the gun was shipped to, contact the FFL, go through whatever circuitous route they need to until they knock on sleeve's door and he's either going to go tell them to fuck off and deal with a shitstorm or he's going to do what reasonable law-abiding citizens who don't like to protect murderers, robbers, and junkies do when the police tell them their previously owned firearm was just used to harm someone, and he's going to say oh yeah that thing, I sold it to a buddy from a car forum, and then they'll still eventually end up in Arizona talking to ParsedOut and finding out that he sold that gun to a random guy in a parking lot.

and then the police are going to inform him that he should be more careful about who he sells his guns to in the future. and ParsedOut will either come on this forum to brag to us about how he's doing the very thing that keeps liberals awake at night, or whatever oddity he conjures up in his mind that justifies his irresponsible behavior, and everyone can come into the thread and pat him on the back for acting irresponsibly even if their mantra is how responsible they all can be and how very responsible all gun owners are and who are we to question them in this regard...or he might actually rethink how he views the world and understand that he played a role, however large or minute, in the commission of a crime downstream from his irresponsible behavior.

[marshallnoise]

Clap clap clap!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

[ParsedOut]

Just sold a .22 lever gun that I never shoot to a guy that I met online and met in a Home Depot parking lot. If you listen very carefully, you can hear a million liberals all gasping at the same time.

[2761377]

You knuckle draggers already know there's a law prohibiting that, right? Seriously... when you portend to be a guns rights enthusiast but don't even know about laws that have been on the books at a national level for nearly 30 years, it makes you look like a bunch of fucking retards.

whatever you think "portend" means, it doesn't fit the context in which you've used it. and "pretend" doesn't, either.

evidently sleeve is right- you lack reading comprehension skills. my comment was just to confirm the position taken by smoothie. there currently is no chance of a National Gun Registry being started; the 2A conversation is about expansion of shall-issue. the only prospect you anti's have involves infringing on the 4th amendment with the "mental illness" card. apparently you all approve of stukaches ratting out enemies.

lastly, it's comical to assert the current Chief Executive, or anybody at DOJ would enforce a 30 year old law that runs counter to his(their) deeply held conviction. especially when he won't enforce laws enacted on his own watch.

knuckle draggers, indeed. did you ever have a thought you could call your own?

[mrsleeve]

You knuckle draggers already know there's a law prohibiting that, right? Seriously... when you portend to be a guns rights enthusiast but don't even know about laws that have been on the books at a national level for nearly 30 years, it makes you look like a bunch of fucking retards.

Context and comprehension are not strong suit of yours is it

We see talking about what he wants.

[ParsedOut]

You knuckle draggers already know there's a law prohibiting that, right? Seriously... when you portend to be a guns rights enthusiast but don't even know about laws that have been on the books at a national level for nearly 30 years, it makes you look like a bunch of fucking retards.

How do you think the new "universal background checks" would be enforced then? Just because there is an in place currently doesn't mean new legislation is immune. Knuckle draggers...nice.

[marshallnoise]

We see talking about what he wants.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk