• 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.

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

Should gun owners be required to report lost or stolen guns?

  • YES

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • NO

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Neutral

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

vbnative73

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
215
Location
Va Beach, 23456
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.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
imported post

Considering the source, I deny validity. Judging from the "information" on their website, I cannot in good conscience support their position.
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
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
 

shad0wfax

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,069
Location
Spokane, Washington, USA
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.
 

Task Force 16

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
2,615
Location
Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
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.
 

KansasMustang

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
1,005
Location
Herington, Kansas, USA
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!
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
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.
 

bobcat

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
167
Location
Great Lakes, , USA
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.
 

Slayer of Paper

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2008
Messages
460
Location
Phoenix, Arizona, USA
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.
 

Gordie

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2008
Messages
716
Location
, Nevada, USA
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!:cuss:
 

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
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.
 

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
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
 

vbnative73

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
215
Location
Va Beach, 23456
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?
 

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
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
 

suntzu

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,230
Location
The south land
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...
 

suntzu

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
1,230
Location
The south land
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...
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
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.
 

LeagueOf1291

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
328
Location
Buffalo Valley, Tennessee, USA
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.
 

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
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
 
Top