• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Obama closes 'loophole' re ATF and trusts...?

Contrarian

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
259
Location
Seattle,WA, , USA
http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2021715605_gunsobamaxml.html

"The Obama administration said Thursday it has closed a loophole in the gun laws that allowed the acquisition of machine guns and similar weapons and has banned U.S. military-style firearms that were sent overseas from returning to this country."

Further along in the article the ATF involvement is mentioned :

"In the past, individuals seeking to avoid personal background checks for machine guns and short-barreled shotguns have claimed they were “trusts or corporations.” But a new ATF regulation will close that loophole and require them to pass background checks."

How does this correlate with the requirements of the Form 1?
 

Black_water

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2013
Messages
125
Location
On The Border in AZ
Because we all know that gangsters and criminals all keep their guns in trusts.

So voter ID is bad, because it impedes lawful voters disproportionately based on the amount of voter fraud...BUT impeding lawful gun ownership disproportionately is fine...go figure.
 

SteveInCO

Regular Member
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
297
Location
El Paso County, Colorado
Because we all know that gangsters and criminals all keep their guns in trusts.

So voter ID is bad, because it impedes lawful voters disproportionately based on the amount of voter fraud...BUT impeding lawful gun ownership disproportionately is fine...go figure.

<begin sarcasm>

Because we all know that voting for a living is a fundamental right, but being able to defend yourself isn't, and that the constitution is exactly backwards on this issue. Therefore it can be ignored.

<end sarcasm>
 
Last edited:

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
Well, it's not exactly the first time the fedgov has gotten one thing right, and then turned around and gotten another wrong.

Frankly, though, I fail to see what this has to do with voter IDs.
 

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
This has nothing whatsoever to do with voter ID, but nevertheless is really flippin annoying.

Too many old collectible guns -- many Stevens come to mind -- fall between the cracks of the NFA.

What are we supposed to do with these weapons -- many of which are now passing from the 1940s "collecto-maniacs" generation to the next -- if the trust option is not available.

Burying grandpa with them is not an option: they don't make caskets that big.
 

KYGlockster

Activist Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Messages
1,842
Location
Ashland, KY
Not only this but they are about to make it where a CLEO will have to sign off on ALL NFA purchases, which will pretty much eliminate the majority of people from being able to purchase NFA items. If we don't stand up and fight this nonsense every NFA item we own will be worthless within several years because they will no longer be transferable if this keeps up.

Instead of eliminating this unconstitutional madness they are strengthening its value to the gun-grabbers! This is serious if you truly care about the Second Amendment, and we need to let those in Congress know what we think about this overreach of the Administration!
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
For the record, I put NFA items in the same category as CWPs: not related to the second amendment. While it's undoubtedly a right to own whatever sort of personal firearms you wish, going through the NFA process is self-evidently privilege.

Frankly, I don't give a damn about NFA trusts. I'd care if repealing the NFA outright was on the table. The second amendment is infringed so long as the NFA is on the books, and whether or not you can get permission from the beneficent state using a trust simply has nothing to do with that.

I'm sure y'all are proud supporters of your "right" to get CWPs, amirite?
 

Black_water

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2013
Messages
125
Location
On The Border in AZ
Well, it's not exactly the first time the fedgov has gotten one thing right, and then turned around and gotten another wrong.

Frankly, though, I fail to see what this has to do with voter IDs.

Voting and gun ownership are rights. IMO, rights are all the same, regardless of what emotional variables people would like to put on them. Back in the day people made emotional pleas to impose poll taxes etc, much the same way people are making pleas today to restrict gun rights. Contrary to what some believe, voting can kill people, but I digress.

Voter ID is being fought for many reasons, one of which is voter fraud is such an insignificant problem that putting up hurdles to lawful voters due to an almost non existent (I disagree with this assessment) voter fraud problem, makes presenting the ID a disproportionate response to said problem.

How it ties in with the trust deal is this: If there are felons cloaking their gun purchases through trusts, it is such an insignificant problem that is does not merit erecting a hurdle to lawful gun owners.

These two things are exactly the same and the comparison is valid.
 
Last edited:

Tackett

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2013
Messages
54
Location
Charleston, wv
For the record, I put NFA items in the same category as CWPs: not related to the second amendment. While it's undoubtedly a right to own whatever sort of personal firearms you wish, going through the NFA process is self-evidently privilege.

Frankly, I don't give a damn about NFA trusts. I'd care if repealing the NFA outright was on the table. The second amendment is infringed so long as the NFA is on the books, and whether or not you can get permission from the beneficent state using a trust simply has nothing to do with that.

I'm sure y'all are proud supporters of your "right" to get CWPs, amirite?

I may not necessarily agree 100% with that statement at the time, but I do like your logic.

Your statement may make me rethink my position.
 

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
Voting and gun ownership are rights. IMO, rights are all the same, regardless of what emotional variables people would like to put on them. Back in the day people made emotional pleas to impose poll taxes etc, much the same way people are making pleas today to restrict gun rights. Contrary to what some believe, voting can kill people, but I digress.

Voter ID is being fought for many reasons, one of which is voter fraud is such an insignificant problem that putting up hurdles to lawful voters due to an almost non existent (I disagree with this assessment) voter fraud problem, makes presenting the ID a disproportionate response to said problem.

How it ties in with the trust deal is this: If there are felons cloaking their gun purchases through trusts, it is such an insignificant problem that is does not merit erecting a hurdle to lawful gun owners.

These two things are exactly the same and the comparison is valid.

Now I understand . . . and agree that the comparison is apt.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Voting is a privilege and not a right. We are not a democracy. We are a Republic (or, at least, we are supposed to be). While it is important that systems are in place to ensure the People are in charge, voting being a right is not necessary to this end.

It is a privilege, one that it is not unreasonable to require that someone prove he has it and is exercising it only once.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
"Insignificant" voter fraud threw the Franken election into question. There is enough known fraud as to outweigh the margin of victory. If he were elected due to that fraud (we can never know), then voter fraud gave us obamacare.
 

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
I'd be interested if anybody could cite this ever actually happening according to a reputable source.

Voter "impersonation" fraud at the polls is so rare that after an extremely intense high level 50 state survey, the Bush administration could only identify nine instances of it over a ten year period. Those who deal in facts but are pushing to impose greater restrictions on the franchise have effectively abandoned the idea that such fraud justifies their proposals for more purges/voter ID/restrictions on early voting/etc. Instead, they talk about an abstraction: "the integrity of the vote."

"Integrity" not only embraces concerns about actual fraud, but people's "feelings" about whether or not an election is fair -- ie the errant, evidence-less crap about "Obamacare" being "shoved down our throats" by Acorn who allegedly stole the election. These arguments amount to justifications about why governments should disenfranchise actual people to make other irrational people "feel" that their government was legitimately selected.

I call BS on that.

The vote is not a privilege -- it is a fundamental right that like the Second Amendment -- is preservative of all other rights. It is what the patriots fought for in our revolution. First and foremost, we need to be assuring that qualified people have reasonable opportunities to exercise the franchise without undue restriction, and that the votes of all qualified voters are counted. We need not sacrifice tens of thousands of legitimate votes to ward off some obsessive-compulsive's irrational fears that a single fraudulent vote may get counted.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
I have mixed feelings on that one.

In one sense, voting is definitionally a "privilege", as one does not have an innate ability to vote without a government first being formed for him to vote in.

In another sense... Individuals have an absolute right to consent (or not) to government. With this in mind, it seems difficult to argue that individuals do not have a right to exercise the modicum of influence afforded to them on/by a government which is otherwise imposed on them without their consent.

If I have a right not to be robbed, then surely it is not a mere "privilege" afforded to me by the robber to entreat him to at least leave me with my shoes. Clearly, this is my right, and were he to then take my shoes he would be violating me yet again.

Chew on that for awhile. :p
 
Last edited:

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia
I have mixed feelings on that one.

In one sense, voting is definitionally a "privilege", as one does not have an innate ability to vote without a government first being formed for him to vote in.

In another sense... Individuals have an absolute right to consent (or not) to government. With this in mind, it seems difficult to argue that individuals do not have a right to exercise the modicum of influence afforded to them on/by a government which is otherwise imposed on them without their consent.

If I have a right not to be robbed, then surely it is not a mere "privilege" afforded to me by the robber to entreat him to at least leave me with my shoes. Clearly, this is my right, and were he to then take my shoes he would be violating me yet again.

Chew on that for awhile. :p

Hobbes claims that in a natural state, there is the war of all against all.

So I suppose, without government, the robber would have as much "right" to your shoes as you would, provided he is able to take them.

But Donkeys do not like the taste of your shoes, and would prefer not to chew on them.

donkey.gif
vomit.gif
 

osmanobma

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2012
Messages
52
Location
Missouri
Voting and gun ownership are rights. IMO, rights are all the same, regardless of what emotional variables people would like to put on them. Back in the day people made emotional pleas to impose poll taxes etc, much the same way people are making pleas today to restrict gun rights. Contrary to what some believe, voting can kill people, but I digress.

Voter ID is being fought for many reasons, one of which is voter fraud is such an insignificant problem that putting up hurdles to lawful voters due to an almost non existent (I disagree with this assessment) voter fraud problem, makes presenting the ID a disproportionate response to said problem.

How it ties in with the trust deal is this: If there are felons cloaking their gun purchases through trusts, it is such an insignificant problem that is does not merit erecting a hurdle to lawful gun owners.

These two things are exactly the same and the comparison is valid.

Saying there is no wide scale voter fraud is like saying there is no stealing in a store where nobody does inventory,
nobody keeps track of the profits and nobody is watching any of the customers. Since when people vote, we don't really
keep track of how many votes are expected to be cast, nobody see's if it's the same people voting, and nobody ever gets
notification that they voted.


Its almost impossible to prove voting fraud, unless someone is caught in the act. There's no database keeping track of who voted,
and the sending some confirmation to you saying you voted or not. I, or anyone else can literally show up to the polls,
claim to be someone else and vote, no questions asked. No tell me you honestly dont think voter fraud is an issue.


When you have districts that have more people voting than registered voters, you have felons, illegals and deceased people
on the voting rolls (democrats favorite voting block), organizations like the now defunct ACORN that have been proven over
and over to register voters fraudulently, and even encourage people to vote twice. And situations like Al Fraken, who miraculously
found a bunch of missing ballots that just so happened to be all for him! How can you even doubt that voting fraud is a hige issue.


Someone has to be INCREDIBLY stupid to be caught committing voter fraud.
Double or Triple voting is easy, because there is no national voter list. Only state voter lists... and nobody is looking for them.
Nobody is checking voting records vs people who are in the hospital or out of town.
Nobody gets confirmation of their voting, so people who didn't vote, don't know that someone else voted for them.
I don't think people even do much checking on if people live where they say... (or really exist if you do it the right way.)


Really the only way's to catch voter fraud is if somebody very obviously gives themselves away, or if there are more
registered votes than voters. Saying there aren't many cases of people committing voter fraud isn't really a valid argument,
because there really aren't tools to catch many people of voter fraud.


Voter ID is just common sense.
I mean... I think we should put as much stringency on helping to decide the fate of the country as we do opening a bank account,
cashing a check or getting a library card. Honestly, it's a miracle anyone can function in todays society WITHOUT a photo ID.
Considering you need one for basically every single legitimate way of getting money outside of somebody with a photo ID giving it to you.
You basically need an ID if you want to exist in society. You need a photo ID or Birth certificate to do pretty much anything in this country.
If you don't have a government issued photo ID, you can't have a bank account.
And you can't cash checks... without ID.
 
Last edited:

The Donkey

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
1,114
Location
Northern Virginia

Saying there is no wide scale voter fraud is like saying there is no stealing in a store where nobody does inventory,
nobody keeps track of the profits and nobody is watching any of the customers. Since when people vote, we don't really
keep track of how many votes are expected to be cast, nobody see's if it's the same people voting, and nobody ever gets
notification that they voted.


Its almost impossible to prove voting fraud, unless someone is caught in the act. There's no database keeping track of who voted,
and the sending some confirmation to you saying you voted or not. I, or anyone else can literally show up to the polls,
claim to be someone else and vote, no questions asked. No tell me you honestly dont think voter fraud is an issue.


When you have districts that have more people voting than registered voters, you have felons, illegals and deceased people
on the voting rolls (democrats favorite voting block), organizations like the now defunct ACORN that have been proven over
and over to register voters fraudulently, and even encourage people to vote twice. And situations like Al Fraken, who miraculously
found a bunch of missing ballots that just so happened to be all for him! How can you even doubt that voting fraud is a hige issue.


Someone has to be INCREDIBLY stupid to be caught committing voter fraud.
Double or Triple voting is easy, because there is no national voter list. Only state voter lists... and nobody is looking for them.
Nobody is checking voting records vs people who are in the hospital or out of town.
Nobody gets confirmation of their voting, so people who didn't vote, don't know that someone else voted for them.
I don't think people even do much checking on if people live where they say... (or really exist if you do it the right way.)


Really the only way's to catch voter fraud is if somebody very obviously gives themselves away, or if there are more
registered votes than voters. Saying there aren't many cases of people committing voter fraud isn't really a valid argument,
because there really aren't tools to catch many people of voter fraud.


Voter ID is just common sense.
I mean... I think we should put as much stringency on helping to decide the fate of the country as we do opening a bank account,
cashing a check or getting a library card. Honestly, it's a miracle anyone can function in todays society WITHOUT a photo ID.
Considering you need one for basically every single legitimate way of getting money outside of somebody with a photo ID giving it to you.
You basically need an ID if you want to exist in society. You need a photo ID or Birth certificate to do pretty much anything in this country.
If you don't have a government issued photo ID, you can't have a bank account.
And you can't cash checks... without ID.

When you go to vote at your precinct, your name is checked off the rolls.

If somebody else claiming to be the same person shows up twice, there's gonna be some 'splainin' to do.

Next year in Virginia, thanks to Republican Party legislators, the state is going to start requiring picture ID to vote, and not accepting non-photo forms of ID such as concealed carry permits, social security cards, voter precinct ID cards, bank statements, and utility bills.

While I suppose it is conceivable for someone to forge someone else's social security card so they can vote twice, the difficulty of pulling this off is so significant and penalties for getting caught so severe that no-one bothers: for the trouble, it is far easier to convince another legitimate voter to show up at the polls. That is why there is no significant evidence of voter fraud -- not because we democrats are so clever about "getting away with it."

So in 2014 a whole lot of non-driver grandmas are going to get a rude surprise when they find that their social security and precinct ID cards are insufficient to permit them to vote. I am going to have a good time telling the grandmas that the Republicans are responsible for this: when these pissed off grandmas return to the polls with their IDs in 2015 and 2016, guess which party they are going to be voting against?

As for Acorn, they paid poor people for each registration they brought in, and did not do adequate quality control: so eventually -- inevitably -- people were trying to register Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck as voters and being paid for it. But Mssrs. Duck and Mouse did not try to vote: they never left Disney World. Bottom line: it was poor management on Acorn's part, not an effort to commit voter fraud, and not one fraudulent vote was cast because of it.
 
Top