View Poll Results: Should gun owners be required to report lost or stolen guns?

Voters
39. You may not vote on this poll
  • YES

    4 10.26%
  • NO

    32 82.05%
  • Neutral

    3 7.69%
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Brady Bunch want to Require Gun Owners to Report Lost or Stolen Guns

  1. #1
    Regular Member vbnative73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Va Beach, 23456
    Posts
    215

    Post imported post

    Per the attached proposal from the Brady bunch to the Obama transition team, they want to Require Gun Owners to Report Lost or Stolen Guns.

    Here is the excerpt:

    Federal law should require gun owners to report in a timely manner missing or stolen guns to federal authorities. This is needed to prevent gun owners from covering up sales to prohibited purchasers by later claiming – when those guns are traced to crime – that their guns were stolen. ATF has reported that in 88% of the firearms traced to crime, the purchaser of the gun is not the same person as the criminal from whom the gun is recovered. While some of these guns may have been stolen from gun owners, often they were sold in the criminal market. Without a reporting requirement, it is difficult to rebut a trafficker’s false claim that a gun was stolen.



    I don't like it when one side disagrees with the idea of another just because it came from the other side. I personally couldn't find a reason to disagree with this one idea, so I'd like to hear what others out there think about it. Maybe there's an angle I missed.



  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Fallon, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    5,580

    Post imported post

    Considering the source, I deny validity. Judging from the "information" on their website, I cannot in good conscience support their position.
    "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin

  3. #3
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    I think the biggest objection to such an idea is that, like all ideas from the Brady Bunch, they want to turn otherwise law abiding citizens into criminals. There may be a multitude of reasons to not report a stolen weapon within some arbitrary time limit. Why should a victim of a crime then be placed at risk of becoming a criminal?

    What this whole proposal reveals to anyone who is paying attention is that the Brady Bunch fully understands that gun registration does not solve crimes!!!

    TFred


  4. #4
    Regular Member shad0wfax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Spokane, Washington, USA
    Posts
    1,067

    Post imported post

    I disagree with new legislation on general principle. We have too much centralized power in this country as it is. If my firearms are truly stolen or lost, I'm going to report them stolen or lost. Who wouldn't?

    I feel this could be an introductory piece of legislation to lay the foundation for a more invasive bit of legislation later on.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    hmmm.......

    Don't law abiding gun owneres already report their guns stolen as soon as they know they're missing?

    It seems to me that only a person that isn't suppose to be in possession of firearms would fail to report stolen guns. I mean, could any of us imagine a former felon calling the cops to report that his illegally owned gun had been stolen?

    Well.... maybe. We have heard of drug dealers reporting their drug stash stolen.

    This sort of law is just another stupid law that doesn't even come close to carrying out it's "stated" intended purpose.

  6. #6
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Post imported post

    IMHO when a LAC has a break-in or robbery he reports all stolen property to the LEC's anyhow. So this would just be targeting gun owners. Okay,,so if you had a Semi-automatic nail gun stolen would THAT be considered a weapon? C'mon these idiots just want to turn us into criminals if we have a weapon stolen.
    Keep your powder dry!
    Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. Thomas Jefferson

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    It is about an opportunity squandered by Sarah Brady in changing the name of her organization at the whim of the media-political winds.

    Many states have graved the name of the National Rifle Association in stone by writing it into law. South Carolina's SECTION 23-31-210. Definitions. (5)(b) for example. This has not yet happened yet for Sarah Brady for all the name changes she has inspired as legislators try to avoid the taint 'gun-grabber'.

    With the Obamination all this will change and Sarah Brady's name and the name of her distemperate termagants will be written large across history.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA osculate my fundament.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Great Lakes, , USA
    Posts
    167

    Post imported post

    Just another piece of the registration puzzle. I can hear it now, 'but what would it hurt'. That's not the question.

    No, no, and no. I'm tired of giving ground.The time'scoming when it will be all or nothing on these issues. Time to take a stand or we'll all have nothing to stand on. Look what giving a little has gotten the liberty/firearms community over the years. Erosion, erosion, erosion. Those that would compromise liberty for some kind of security deserve neither (Mr. Franklin's idea).

    Time the Brady Bunch's office was moved out to sea, permanently. Let 'em talk to the fishes.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    460

    Post imported post

    This is needed to prevent gun owners from covering up sales to prohibited purchasers by later claiming – when those guns are traced to crime – that their guns were stolen.
    As well as preventing gun owners from claiming their guns were stolen or lost when the government comes to confiscate them. Don't kid yourselves, THAT is what this is about.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , Nevada, USA
    Posts
    716

    Post imported post

    Slayer of Paper wrote:
    This is needed to prevent gun owners from covering up sales to prohibited purchasers by later claiming – when those guns are traced to crime – that their guns were stolen.
    As well as preventing gun owners from claiming their guns were stolen or lost when the government comes to confiscate them. Don't kid yourselves, THAT is what this is about.
    I think you nailed it!

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    2,546

    Post imported post

    More than that, this shifts the burden of guilt from being on the thief to the "registered gun owner." Say my gun is stolen while I'm away on vacation, I come back and don't notice immediately (long shot, but theoretically possible due to a number of scenarios), and it's used that day/night (or the next) in the commission of a crime. I now have to explain why I didn't report it stolen, and may find myself legally liable for violation of that law.

    It becomes even more complicated when you start thinking about letting your friends borrow your gun for a bit. Say you've let your friend borrow your pistol/rifle/shotgun for a while - they have a stalker but cannot afford to purchase their own, for example. The gun gets stolen from them, but they don't tell you immediately because they're afraid you'd be mad and they want to save up enough to offer to buy a replacement.

    The gun gets used in a crime... who's in trouble? Both you and your friend, you for not reporting that you've transferred firearm possession, your friend for not reporting it stolen?

    The law is per se dangerous and restrictive. It can hurt in many ways, some I've thought of (above), others that I've not (or not elaborated... this law leads to required registration, for example). Hence... it's a definite NO.
    "If we were to ever consider citizenship as the least bit matter of merit instead of birthright, imagine who should be selected as deserved representation of our democracy: someone who would risk their daily livelihood to cast an individually statistically insignificant vote, or those who wrap themselves in the flag against slightest slights." - agenthex

  12. #12
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828

    Post imported post

    Should Government be able to DEMAND that I report a property crime? .... NO!

    Just because I may think it is wise for me to report the theft of my property to a lawenforcement agency does not mean that I want government to be able to demand that I do so.

    JoeSparky
    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  13. #13
    Regular Member vbnative73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Va Beach, 23456
    Posts
    215

    Post imported post

    I've seen a lot of good points made. I agree with the fact that we shouldn't be "made" to file a report. On the other hand, if a law were passed to force local and state law enforcement agencies to pass on such reports to federal authorities, I don't think I'd have a problem with that since it places no more burden on me, the gun owner.

    As a responsible gun owner, I'm going to file a report if my gun is stolen. I'd like the government to make the most of the information that I voluntarily provide to them.

    Opinions?



  14. #14
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828

    Post imported post

    As I made my post I had some thoughts....

    There are ALREADY "Accessory before and after-the-fact laws"---- ENFORCE our current laws instead of creating NEW ONES THAT WON'T GET ENFORCED EITHER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    JoeSparky

    edited to correct spelling and add signature


    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The south land
    Posts
    1,230

    Post imported post

    vbnative73 wrote:
    Per the attached proposal from the Brady bunch to the Obama transition team, they want to Require Gun Owners to Report Lost or Stolen Guns.

    Here is the excerpt:

    Federal law should require gun owners to report in a timely manner missing or stolen guns to federal authorities. This is needed to prevent gun owners from covering up sales to prohibited purchasers by later claiming – when those guns are traced to crime – that their guns were stolen. ATF has reported that in 88% of the firearms traced to crime, the purchaser of the gun is not the same person as the criminal from whom the gun is recovered. While some of these guns may have been stolen from gun owners, often they were sold in the criminal market. Without a reporting requirement, it is difficult to rebut a trafficker’s false claim that a gun was stolen.



    I don't like it when one side disagrees with the idea of another just because it came from the other side. I personally couldn't find a reason to disagree with this one idea, so I'd like to hear what others out there think about it. Maybe there's an angle I missed.

    The problem with this--the Brady group, like all anti 2A individuals want to take the firearms out of the hands of the law abiding citizen and turn us into unarmed sheep just waiting to be victimized. They want us disarmed--and this is just another way to have defacto registration..because the Brady group has been pushing for nation wide registration for some time....

    I think what we need is sensible laws--laws aimed at strengthening the rights of the American people, and incorporating every Amendment and making them all applicable on every state, whether the anti 2A people like it or not, and give the people total immunity from all civil and criminal prosecution in the event that we should have to defend ourselves.... I think we need to make it a requirement--national requirement if need be, that every head of house who can pass a fingerprint check be required to keep at least one firearm in their home, or keep one on their person at all times and effectively learn how to use it....take a lesson from Kennesaw, Georgia...

    Law abiding citizens are not the problem, contrary to what Brady would have us believe...the criminals are the problem....and for some reason the Brady group just can't seem to grasp that one simple little concept. Why not enforce the laws already on the books and concentrate on putting those actually IN jail who need to be there and free those who do not? Put the violent offenders away, and free the petty, non violent offenders and come up with some alternative means of punishment for them other than prison...



  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The south land
    Posts
    1,230

    Post imported post

    vbnative73 wrote:
    I've seen a lot of good points made. I agree with the fact that we shouldn't be "made" to file a report. On the other hand, if a law were passed to force local and state law enforcement agencies to pass on such reports to federal authorities, I don't think I'd have a problem with that since it places no more burden on me, the gun owner.

    As a responsible gun owner, I'm going to file a report if my gun is stolen. I'd like the government to make the most of the information that I voluntarily provide to them.

    Opinions?

    Nothing you tell the government can be used to help you. Everything you tell a government agent can be used against you...



  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    There are an estimated 22,000 anti-gun laws on the books, most of which are not enforced or lead to a slap on the wrist for real bad guys. The Brady Bunch proposals put the onus on law abiding citizens by either demanding extra from them than would be demanded from citizens regarding any other type of private property, even private property not specifically protected by the constitution, or by barring them from legally obtaining and owning the type of products they want to have.

    The Brady Bunch and our government wants to control not crime, but access and use of firearms by law abiding citizens.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Buffalo Valley, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    329

    Post imported post

    Legislation of this kind would just be a precursor to regulating the manner in which we store and maintain firearms. Pretty soon, there'd be an amendment establishing some sort of punishment for the failure to keep the weapons from being stolen.

  19. #19
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
    Posts
    3,828

    Post imported post

    LeagueOf1291 wrote:
    Legislation of this kind would just be a precursor to regulating the manner in which we store and maintain firearms. Pretty soon, there'd be an amendment establishing some sort of punishment for the failure to keep the weapons from being stolen.

    EQUIVALENT TO BLAMING, PROSECUTING, AND INCARCERATINGTHE GIRL FOR THE FACT THAT SHE WAS RAPED!!!!!


    edited to add ", prosecuting, and incarcerating"

    JoeSparky


    RIGHTS don't exist without RESPONSIBILITY!
    If one is not willing to stand for his rights, he doesn't have any Rights.
    I will strive to stand for the rights of ANY person, even those folks with whom I disagree!
    As said by SVG--- "I am not anti-COP, I am PRO-Citizen" and I'll add, PRO-Constitution.
    If the above makes me a RADICAL or EXTREME--- So be it!

    Life Member NRA
    Life Member GOA
    2nd amendment says.... "...The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •