Gun Laws (complete mess)

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by dukebound85, Apr 15, 2013.

  1. macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #1
    I have been reading up on gun laws at the federal, state, and local level near my residence. In short, it is ASTONISHING how far apart they are.

    What is legal in one state is a felony offense and mandatory jail time in another. This even pertains to interstate traveling with a firearm in the vehicle (moving, etc).

    Additionally, some states (like mine), you don't have to have a permit to buy or own a handgun, yet in places like NY or the NE area in general, better off just leaving your handgun/rifle back home with family.

    I know I may be speaking to the choir to some, but I know I never really looked in depth on how restrictive many laws already are. Heck, a Connecticut senator wants to make it a felony to own a gun that is made to fire more than one round

    The more I research this, the more I want looser Federal preemption over state laws and for state laws to be even more lenient. I am glad my state allows for relatively unrestricted open carry without any permit required, as well as the legal ability to keep a loaded gun in my car, both of which I think I will plan on doing in the near future.

    For reference, one of many sites that have consumed the better part of my weekend has been sites like this:
    http://www.handgunlaw.us
     
  2. macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #2
    It would make more sense to have federal laws that apply everywhere instead of a mess of 50 different state laws, and even more local ones. What you're suggesting would just make things even more of a mess.
     
  3. macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #3
    Let's just go back to the wild west days eh ?

    Yet another gun thread. There's almost as many gun threads as there are guns.
     
  4. thread starter macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #4
    I disagree

    Federal Laws should trump state laws when it comes to (especially) interstate travel

    At the moment, you need to know the gun laws of every state you are going through or you can be in a load of trouble for what was legal in other states but not one particular one.

    Things like this SHOULD never happen
    http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/092029p.pdf
    or here is a synopsis
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/18/traveling-mans-gun-arrest-appealed-supreme-court/

    I know it's Fox, but it provides a summary of the court case I posted above
     
  5. macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #5
    You're contradicting yourself in the OP you say you don't want federal laws to preempt state laws, and then you say that federal laws to preempt state laws.

    And in the case you just cited it was a state law that the person was charged under, so I'm not sure what you are trying to argue...
     
  6. thread starter macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #6
    No, I said I want Federal laws to preempt (supersede) state law, especially in firearm transport across states. Not sure how you read it in my OP but that was what I meant.

    If federal laws were in place to allow for interstate travel, then the state law used to arrest the Utah man in NJ would not have happened
     
  7. Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #7
    Because less restrictive gun laws mean traveling caravans being destroyed by pillaging Native Americans?
     
  8. macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #8
    I posted a thread a while back on why we need national gun laws. This mish mash of 50 different state laws are crazy plus you have dozens of municipal laws as well.

    Interesting and relevant post at SCOTUS blog earlier.



     
  9. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2012
    Location:
    DC
    #9
    Can someone just make another gun forum now and be done with it?

    As to the fundamental revelation though, LOTS of laws on all sorts of topics vary from state to state. Some things even vary city-to-city and county-to-county. This makes for all sorts of fun legal debates where jurisdiction is not established. One example is that different states have different minimum ages to marry ... so a wedding that is legal one place would be a no-no just down the road.

    Here in DC things are so fragmented that you can go through several jurisdictions in a small area. The city has the sidewalk. The park police have the actual park. Then there might be places inside the park that are controlled by yet someone else. All of them with their own individual laws. I have also seen police here going through several different lawbooks and explaining they can use whichever book is most useful to them at the time ... seriously. The city transportation system is a joint VA/DC/MD venture with (you guessed it) its own jurisdiction and places where you can exit the same station and be in either DC or MD (all with their own laws of course).

    ----------

    Well, if those caravans had not invaded the areas under broken promises in the first place ...
     
  10. macrumors G3

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #10
    MacRumors needs an official 'gun thread'. ;)

    If so I'd add this:
    Murders, Shooting, and Gun Sales- An Average Day in the U.S.

    That's approaching 30000 people killed each year by guns, and 60k shot.
     
  11. macrumors 6502

    lannister80

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    Location:
    Chicagoland
    #11
    Pillaging??? Yeah, how dare they do that to invading people from another continent who considered them sub-human and proceeded to wipe out 95% of the population in the next 100 years.

    Not to thread jack, but UGH, the entitlement is strong with this one.
     
  12. Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #12
    In what way it that entitlement?
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2012
    Location:
    DC
    #13
    Just ASSUMING that people somehow have rights to the land that other people were already using maybe? Then taking the second group to task when they complained. Why is it non-native pro-gun peeps never say native americans were just excersing their second amenment rights when all they were doing was defending their property from invaders?
     
  14. macrumors 68040

    bradl

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    #14
    Well said. And with that, here's an old post of mine. I think it says it all:

     
  15. Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #15
    Awesome. So a comment about turning American into the Wild West again (not by me) has ended in me having an entitlement mentality.

    Just awesome. :D
     
  16. zin
    macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #16
    If your argument is you need a firearm to defend your property, then why not use one of the hundreds of non-lethal weapons available? I know, for instance, in the US you can buy tasers. You could easily incapacitate and then disorientate an intruder for more than long enough for the police to arrive and arrest them.

    Not only does this avoid unnecessary (IMO) death, but it also prevents you from being liable (perhaps the family of the intruder could file a lawsuit against you for what they claim to be trigger-happy).
     
  17. macrumors 68030

    Arran

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Location:
    Atlanta, USA
    #17
    I don't think that's what Peace meant. I think he was referring to a lawless free-for-all where the white men were shooting each other and it was impossible to know who was 'right' and who was 'wrong'. (Correct me if I'm wrong)
     
  18. Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #18
    Oh. Then I don't really see how that's applicable here.
     
  19. macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #19
    It sounds like you're arguing that the laws you agree with in your state should be, through the power of the federal government, made to apply in other states whose laws you disagree with.
     
  20. macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #20
    ^^This^^

    It's part of states rights in the Constitution. And eric my friend. You should study up on who started scalping. Native Americans were merely trying to protect their land. We came here and took all their land. They were already here.

    What would you do if somebody came to your property and decided it was theirs ?
     
  21. macrumors 65816

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #21
    Oh the irony :D :rolleyes:
     
  22. Guest

    eric/

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio, United States
    #22
    Where did I say anything contrary to that?
     
  23. thread starter macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #23
    More or less (I admit) in regards to interstate travel. I am not keen on how something completely legal in one state is an automatic felony and jail time in another.
     
  24. macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #24
    I have nothing against a person protecting their property. I never said I did.
     
  25. macrumors 65816

    SLC Flyfishing

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #25
    That's not what's ironic, at least not to me.
     

Share This Page