You are Unregistered, please register to use all of the features of FirearmsTalk.com!    
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism >

American Bar Association Ask States To Adopt Firearms Confiscation Laws


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-29-2017, 07:41 PM   #11
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
primer1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,700
Liked 5579 Times on 3423 Posts

Default

If she lied about having firearms,and she happened to shoot someone in self defense, she would have little to no chance of proving to the jury she was justified in pulling the trigger.
__________________
Feral cat waterboarder
primer1 is offline  
kfox75 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2017, 01:45 AM   #12
I used to play keyboards, but now ...
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Balota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Glenpool, Oklahoma
Posts: 8,135
Liked 8326 Times on 4487 Posts
Likes Given: 6365

Default

Hawaii is in the top 5, maybe the top 3, States with the worst anti-gun laws.
__________________
Balota
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
Practice does NOT make perfect. Practice makes permanent. Only perfect practice makes perfect.
Generalizations are (almost) always bad.
http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f138/10th-ftf-shotgun-shoot-hoot-vanzant-mo-oct-13-14-15-2017-a-123120/#post1850960
Balota is offline  
Mosin Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2017, 06:31 AM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Dallas53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Deep Central East Texas
Posts: 6,288
Liked 8162 Times on 4462 Posts
Likes Given: 13902

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Balota View Post
Hawaii is in the top 5, maybe the top 3, States with the worst anti-gun laws.
sometimes i think people forget about Hawaii since it's so far out there away from the mainland.

but yes, Hawaii does have some very restrictive gun laws. i have no exact idea as to where they rank, but just a guess, in the top ten states with the most restrictive gun laws.
__________________
Gone Back To The Woods!
Dallas53 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2017, 08:07 PM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mosin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: The Eagles Nest
Posts: 7,280
Liked 7400 Times on 3640 Posts
Likes Given: 2315

Default

Hawaiis overrun with asians.

And I don't mean that to disparage asians, it's just that they come from china and Japan and places where there's strict government control over everything. So whenever some genius gets an idea for a new law in Hawaii, all these people just go ahead with it.
Their culture has no consideration of rights, deferring to letting the government tell them everything because that's what they know.

Hawaii has rules for its rules.
__________________
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience , kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

Galatians 5:22-23

Pray for the hundreds of thousands of innocent people being killed by Islam across the world.
Mosin is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2017, 08:53 PM   #15
I used to play keyboards, but now ...
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Balota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Glenpool, Oklahoma
Posts: 8,135
Liked 8326 Times on 4487 Posts
Likes Given: 6365

Default

True. But some of those "rules for its rules" are supposed to be the BoR. Just sayin'
__________________
Balota
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
Practice does NOT make perfect. Practice makes permanent. Only perfect practice makes perfect.
Generalizations are (almost) always bad.
http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f138/10th-ftf-shotgun-shoot-hoot-vanzant-mo-oct-13-14-15-2017-a-123120/#post1850960
Balota is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2017, 09:05 PM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mosin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: The Eagles Nest
Posts: 7,280
Liked 7400 Times on 3640 Posts
Likes Given: 2315

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Balota View Post
True. But some of those "rules for its rules" are supposed to be the BoR. Just sayin'
Oh I agree fully. You have to live there I guess to understand it.
I mean Hawaii became a state in what, '59?

People there really don't have any loyalty or patriotism ingrained in them.

Everyone's 'filipino' 'micronesian' 'japanese' etc.....

I mean, our state flag is basically the British flag.
__________________
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience , kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

Galatians 5:22-23

Pray for the hundreds of thousands of innocent people being killed by Islam across the world.
Mosin is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2017, 10:58 PM   #17
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hairbear1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Molong,NSW Australia
Posts: 984
Liked 1016 Times on 477 Posts
Likes Given: 41

Default

In Australia if say a husband and wife are in the process of divorcing and it's starting to go down the path of somewhere between nasty and a good old ****fight where the woman hits the husband with a DVO(Domestic Violence Order) because she knows he has guns so this is a big get even the Police have to remove the guns from the husband even if she's claiming that the husband is abusive,threatening, bashed her etc but it's manufactured crap.

This DVO can mean that the husband can lose his guns and license for up to 10 years and then he has to reapply and go through all the crap that goes with it and also hopes that he will be allowed to reapply for his guns and license.

Women get the preferential treatment with basically no questions asked in these cases but recent legislation has been enacted that a vexatious claim can be thrown out and the litigant can cop a bit of trouble from the law for this.
__________________
The ability to think and speak doesn't necessarily guarantee intelligence
hairbear1 is offline  
Mosin Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2017, 02:03 AM   #18
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
kfox75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Wrong side of the tracks, Erie PA,
Posts: 7,206
Liked 6991 Times on 3974 Posts
Likes Given: 33077

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hairbear1 View Post
In Australia if say a husband and wife are in the process of divorcing and it's starting to go down the path of somewhere between nasty and a good old ****fight where the woman hits the husband with a DVO(Domestic Violence Order) because she knows he has guns so this is a big get even the Police have to remove the guns from the husband even if she's claiming that the husband is abusive,threatening, bashed her etc but it's manufactured crap.

This DVO can mean that the husband can lose his guns and license for up to 10 years and then he has to reapply and go through all the crap that goes with it and also hopes that he will be allowed to reapply for his guns and license.

Women get the preferential treatment with basically no questions asked in these cases but recent legislation has been enacted that a vexatious claim can be thrown out and the litigant can cop a bit of trouble from the law for this.
Here's my own take on it.

If it's a case of he said, she said, with no incriminating evidence, than no firearms should be touched by LE in that case.

however, if LE gets to the door, and the woman comes out covered in blood, with bruises, a broken nose, and an eye swelled shut, and the man has torn up knuckles, that's a different matter entirely. If both look like they just went 15 rounds with Mike Tyson, and I don't mean on the NES game from the 1980s, than yes. That IS a case where LE would be more than justified in taking the firearms, with the exception of the vicitm's PDW, but only if there IS Solid Proof of what happened.

however, I think most of y'all are missing the point here. How many women who are Armed, are just going to let some grabastic POS beat on them, and not fight back? none that I know, that's for $#!+ sure.

the other thing to keep in mind is that removing the firearms does not usurp the person's 2A rights, as the 2A just says ARMS, which can be anything from a sock filled with ball bearings to a rocket launcher, so they still have the right to, and would still have tools to, defend them self from attack.
__________________
Guns don't kill people. Blood loss and organ failure do.

I may live in the North, but I still uphold the Southern Values I was raised with.

lifetime member. NAHC, NRA, And SCOPE NY

If it's a nice enough day to wash the bike, it's d@mn well also a nice enough day to be riding it instead.
kfox75 is offline  
Dallas53 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2017, 07:11 AM   #19
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Dallas53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Deep Central East Texas
Posts: 6,288
Liked 8162 Times on 4462 Posts
Likes Given: 13902

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kfox75 View Post
Here's my own take on it.

If it's a case of he said, she said, with no incriminating evidence, than no firearms should be touched by LE in that case.

however, if LE gets to the door, and the woman comes out covered in blood, with bruises, a broken nose, and an eye swelled shut, and the man has torn up knuckles, that's a different matter entirely. If both look like they just went 15 rounds with Mike Tyson, and I don't mean on the NES game from the 1980s, than yes. That IS a case where LE would be more than justified in taking the firearms, with the exception of the vicitm's PDW, but only if there IS Solid Proof of what happened.

however, I think most of y'all are missing the point here. How many women who are Armed, are just going to let some grabastic POS beat on them, and not fight back? none that I know, that's for $#!+ sure.

the other thing to keep in mind is that removing the firearms does not usurp the person's 2A rights, as the 2A just says ARMS, which can be anything from a sock filled with ball bearings to a rocket launcher, so they still have the right to, and would still have tools to, defend them self from attack.
i have to agree. there should be evidence or proof of domestic violence, other than just someone saying there is, out of spite for the other person.

i think there should be penalties just like if a person files a false police report. no RO should be issued just at face value.

and domestic violence is a real problem, but it lessens the need for action if some people are using it as a tool to get back at their partner or significant other, because they are mad at them, and there is no violence involved.

and it also IMO, lessens the strong roles of woman and undermines all they have accomplished in all these years.

and trust me, i'd be scared to go to sleep if i was beating on my wife. i'd wake up the next day with bruises and broken bones from an iron skillet or baseball bat!

and just to be clear, any man who beats on women and children is part of that group of some of the lowest POS scum there is, and deserve to have their guns taken away!
__________________
Gone Back To The Woods!
Dallas53 is offline  
kfox75 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Dems adopt new tactic for gun confiscation 1911man Legal and Activism 53 06-09-2017 02:30 PM
Since we have two other "Ask " threads,...this one is Called " Ask an American Jew" DrFootball Politics, Religion and Controversy 168 07-19-2014 07:39 PM
HR 4380 to limit federal funds to states with confiscation or registration of firearm CGS Legal and Activism 0 04-16-2014 09:44 PM
Should the United States adopt a form of gun control? prsabordo Legal and Activism 39 12-06-2010 05:07 AM