ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags gun laws

Reply
Old 1st May 2018, 05:16 PM   #1
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Another WA Gun Initiative.

The passage of I-594 (universal bkgd checks) was a big boost for the gun control crowd a few years ago. It seems some people are ignoring the new laws created by the initiative and only one arrest has been made. Some people do go through a dealer to make a private sale, but as far as I know, most people still don't bother. At least one provision of I-594 has been eased. For example it is no longer a crime to allow a friend to shoot your gun at the local gun club without a bkgd check.

https://gunresponsibility.org/news/b...ssault-weapon/

Quote:
Raise the minimum purchase age to 21 for all semi-automatic weapons.
In Washington, it is currently easier to buy an assault weapon than it is to purchase a handgun because assault weapons are treated the same as hunting rifles. This must change.
I guess some adults just aren't supposed to enjoy their civil rights.

Quote:
Create an Enhanced Background Check at the time of purchase including:
A local law enforcement check identical to the one we currently require for handguns.
Requiring the purchaser show that they have completed a safety training course within the last five years that includes basic safety and safe storage rules, safe handling, and an overview of state and federal firearms laws.
There is a bit more bkgd checking for a handgun purchase in WA other than the federal NICS bkgd check. I can't really see this doing anything to reduce crime.

When Hawaii passed a similar law in the 90's, many people used the hunter safety course to obtain proof of the course.

Quote:
Dangerous Access Prevention.
Holds gun owners responsible if a child or other prohibited person accesses and uses an unsafely stored firearm to harm themselves or another person.
The one thing that would probably pass on the ballot if it was all by itself.

Quote:
Ensure continued eligibility to possess or purchase an assault weapon.
Requires the Washington Department of Licensing (DOL) and the appropriate law enforcement agencies to work together to develop a process to ensure that purchasers continue to be eligible to possess a firearm.
The actual text of the initiative is just as vague.

Quote:
Require informed consent at the point of purchase about the inherent risks associated with the presence of a firearm in the home.
Requires the notification at the point of sale that owning a firearm increases one’s risk for injury, death by suicide, domestic violence and homicide.
Establish a waiting period up to 10 days for the purchase of an assault weapon.
Yeah yeah, guns r bad. Gimme my Ruger 10/22.


https://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elect...446pm_364.docx
While most definitions of assault weapons say something like semi-auto that have 1 or 2 of a list of six various features, this initiative will define all semi-auto rifles as assault rifles; except for antiques and non-functioning guns.

Quote:
Sec. 16. RCW 9.41.010 and 2018 c 7 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
(30) “Semiautomatic assault rifle” means any rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge.
Ranb
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st May 2018, 05:27 PM   #2
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 18,324
They're just gun nuts. They're a sacrifice I'm willing to make. It's good that people would be unsure or scared to buy or transfer guns. If it gets gun ownership rates down, it's a positive.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st May 2018, 07:59 PM   #3
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
They're just gun nuts. They're a sacrifice I'm willing to make. It's good that people would be unsure or scared to buy or transfer guns. If it gets gun ownership rates down, it's a positive.
What are you talking about? Since 2014 gun sales have only increased as far as I can tell. I-594 has not seemed to reduced gun sales at all nor discouraged purchases.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st May 2018, 11:25 PM   #4
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 18,324
But the data suggests the number of gun owners is going down. It's more guns going into the same hands. We don't appear to be generating new gun owners.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 03:57 AM   #5
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Just move to VA, then you don't even need a license to carry concealed. A true gun owners paradise.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 03:58 AM   #6
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
What are you talking about? Since 2014 gun sales have only increased as far as I can tell. I-594 has not seemed to reduced gun sales at all nor discouraged purchases.
Not since 2016. See all the gun manufactures going bankrupt after expanding to sell more guns to the same politically motivated buyers. The surge in gun sales was never to new gun owners.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 05:54 AM   #7
Joe Random
Graduate Poster
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,951
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post

Quote:
Requiring the purchaser show that they have completed a safety training course within the last five years that includes basic safety and safe storage rules, safe handling, and an overview of state and federal firearms laws.

There is a bit more bkgd checking for a handgun purchase in WA other than the federal NICS bkgd check. I can't really see this doing anything to reduce crime.
Regarding that bit specifically :

I've long been of the opinion that safety training should be mandatory for anyone purchasing a firearm (mainly because of the mind-numbingly stupid things I've seen/heard of people doing in no way related to self defense or crisis situations), but have wondered if that would be practical in reality. Would there be places where the courses were so expensive that it put things out of reach for people? Or places where there simply weren't courses offered anywhere remotely near by? Would there have to be state/federal guidelines drawn up for what the courses had to teach and how (to prevent, say, me from charging people $100 to tell them "don't keep it loaded and unlocked at home" then sending them on their way with a cert)?

I haven't owned a firearm or gone shooting in years so this is all academic for me at this point. Curious if you think the safety training bit is workable and/or a good thing in this case?

Oh, and that "Require informed consent" part looks utterly asinine. Comes off just as transparent as requiring doctors to tell women about all the horrors abortion might bring before performing one.
Joe Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 06:21 AM   #8
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
 
casebro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,613
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
They're just gun nuts. They're a sacrifice I'm willing to make. It's good that people would be unsure or scared to buy or transfer guns. If it gets gun ownership rates down, it's a positive.
"They came for my neighbors' guns, and I didn't say anything, I was not a gun owner. Then they came for my whiskey..."
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas.
Medium minds discuss events.
Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.
casebro is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 06:24 AM   #9
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Originally Posted by Joe Random View Post
Regarding that bit specifically :

I've long been of the opinion that safety training should be mandatory for anyone purchasing a firearm
That is just silly, guns are inherently safe that is why they are specifically excluded from all consumer safety laws. You can force a company to recall a chair but guns are only ever voluntary recalls. Treating them as dangerous is gun grabby nonsense.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 07:57 AM   #10
beren
Graduate Poster
 
beren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 1,229
Originally Posted by casebro View Post
"They came for my neighbors' guns, and I didn't say anything, I was not a gun owner. Then they came for my whiskey..."
"They came for my neighbor's rape room and torture chamber, and I said nothing because I am not a serial rapist. Then they came for collection of porcelain figurines . . . ."


I mean, mine makes as much sense as yours...
__________________
There’s only four things you can be in life: sober, tipsy, drunk and hungover. Tipsy is the only one where you don’t cry when you’re doing it. ~ James Acaster
beren is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 01:51 PM   #11
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
But the data suggests the number of gun owners is going down. It's more guns going into the same hands. We don't appear to be generating new gun owners.
Got a link to the data you have? What does your claim have to do with bkgd checks or other issues affected by the initiative?

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Not since 2016. See all the gun manufactures going bankrupt after expanding to sell more guns to the same politically motivated buyers. The surge in gun sales was never to new gun owners.
Link?

Last edited by Ranb; 2nd May 2018 at 01:53 PM.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 01:56 PM   #12
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by Joe Random View Post
Regarding that bit specifically :
.... Would there be places where the courses were so expensive that it put things out of reach for people? Or places where there simply weren't courses offered anywhere remotely near by?....
I'm certain there are going to be people who will have a hard time finding the services required to able to buy a gun. In Western WA where I live and in Hawaii where I used to live various gun clubs have stepped up to provide the required training for a reasonable price.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 02:03 PM   #13
Fudbucker
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,537
Gun owners should be required to purchase "gun insurance".
Fudbucker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 02:03 PM   #14
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
That is just silly, guns are inherently safe that is why they are specifically excluded from all consumer safety laws. You can force a company to recall a chair but guns are only ever voluntary recalls. Treating them as dangerous is gun grabby nonsense.
You're saying that there is a federal law shielding the gun industry from recalls?
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 02:11 PM   #15
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Not since 2016. See all the gun manufactures going bankrupt after expanding to sell more guns to the same politically motivated buyers. The surge in gun sales was never to new gun owners.
All as in Colt and Remington? Doesn't seem like the industry is in big trouble for the most part.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 02:35 PM   #16
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,364
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
I guess some adults just aren't supposed to enjoy their civil rights.
This is a not an unprecedented state of affairs - we do the same thing by restricting alcohol sales to over 21, even though it's 18 for tobacco products. It's true that's inconsistent ... but is it much of a hardship, in practice?

Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
What are you talking about? Since 2014 gun sales have only increased as far as I can tell. I-594 has not seemed to reduced gun sales at all nor discouraged purchases.
As others have pointed out, this seems to be inaccurate. My methodology is loose - "gun sales have fallen" yields 10 million hits, "gun sales have risen" yields 1 million hits. Can you indicate how you're getting your data?
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 02:44 PM   #17
Minoosh
Philosopher
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 9,364
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
All as in Colt and Remington? Doesn't seem like the industry is in big trouble for the most part.
Smith & Wesson? How many companies should be involved in order to make the point?

I'm not a gun control idealist ... I just really wonder where you are getting your data.

I've seen a couple of explanations. "They are coming for your guns" helps gun sales, "Don't worry, your rights are secure" doesn't. Also, abbreviated deer seasons due to climate issues.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 05:10 PM   #18
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
As others have pointed out, this seems to be inaccurate. My methodology is loose - "gun sales have fallen" yields 10 million hits, "gun sales have risen" yields 1 million hits. Can you indicate how you're getting your data?
I'm restricting my remarks to WA; my place of residence at this time. The few searches I've made on the net show that sales are increasing. http://q13fox.com/2016/06/16/washing...gun-purchases/
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd May 2018, 05:14 PM   #19
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Smith & Wesson? How many companies should be involved in order to make the point?
I'm not sure what ponderingturtle meant by "See all the gun manufactures going bankrupt".

Quote:
I'm not a gun control idealist ... I just really wonder where you are getting your data.
I got my data with a google search on gun makers going bankrupt. Doesn't seem to be lots of them actually closing their manufacturing plants.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 04:46 AM   #20
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
Link?
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...ckpiling-guns/

"Since the 2008 election of President Obama, the number of firearms manufactured in the U.S. has tripled, while imports have doubled. This doesn’t mean more households have guns than ever before—that percentage has stayed fairly steady for decades. Rather, more guns are being stockpiled by a small number of individuals. Three percent of the population now owns half of the country’s firearms, says a recent, definitive study from the Injury Control Research Center at Harvard University."
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 04:48 AM   #21
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
You're saying that there is a federal law shielding the gun industry from recalls?
Yes

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/featu...-t-be-recalled

They are specifically exempted from laws that permit the government to issue a product recall.

But hey even if the gun goes off in a holster with the safety on it is still a negligent discharge so the guys son in the story was really the negligent one not the manufacturer.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 04:49 AM   #22
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
I'm restricting my remarks to WA; my place of residence at this time. The few searches I've made on the net show that sales are increasing. http://q13fox.com/2016/06/16/washing...gun-purchases/
Um got anything from after Trumps Election? Citing june 2016 isn't current enough for this discussion.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 04:51 AM   #23
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
I'm not sure what ponderingturtle meant by "See all the gun manufactures going bankrupt".
Many gun manufacterers expanded greatly to deal with the obama response gun surge, when Trump was elected sales slumped and this is causing many to go bankrupt. The all in that sentence is that many have gone bankrupt not a claim that all gun manufacturers have.

You seem remarkably ignorant of recent trends and laws effecting gun safety for someone so into guns.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 04:53 AM   #24
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
I'm not sure what ponderingturtle meant by "See all the gun manufactures going bankrupt".


I got my data with a google search on gun makers going bankrupt. Doesn't seem to be lots of them actually closing their manufacturing plants.
It is just the start of the bankruptcy process for them, selling off such assets would be a part that happens further along.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 07:27 AM   #25
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Yes....
Or so your link says. What does the law actually say?

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Um got anything from after Trumps Election? Citing june 2016 isn't current enough for this discussion.
http://thedataface.com/2018/03/economy/us-gun-sales
This link shows that sales have greatly increased in WA over the last several years but dipped from 2016 to 2017.

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
It is just the start of the bankruptcy process for them, selling off such assets would be a part that happens further along.
Bankruptcy doesn't actually mean a business stops selling products. It can mean a restructuring. If they go out of business then creditors might not be able to get their money back.

Last edited by Ranb; 3rd May 2018 at 07:44 AM.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 07:41 AM   #26
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
Or so your link says. What does the law actually say?
How about what the Consumer Product Saftey comission says?

" (iii) Recalls

Additionally, CPSC works well with industry to recall products that, due to a design or manufacturing defect, are unreasonably dangerous. CPSC works closely with companies to put together a Corrective Action Plan to address the hazard, and then monitors the recall to make sure it is effective. Every year the CPSC works with scores of firms to conduct hundreds of recalls, covering consumer products as varied as infant toys, power tools, and even bulletproof vests.

b. CPSC Having Jurisdiction Would Make Guns Safer

Under our present statutory restrictions, we cannot work with industry to pass voluntary standards, pass mandatory standards, work with manufacturers or retailers to recall defective guns or ammunition, and we cannot study the patterns of unintentional deaths and injuries associated with guns. Any of these activities could, without infringing any Second Amendment right, help make guns less likely to cause accidental deaths and injuries."

https://leadership.cpsc.gov/robinson...ke-guns-safer/

Guns are inherently safe unlike say a microwave.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 07:45 AM   #27
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
http://thedataface.com/2018/03/economy/us-gun-sales
This link shows that sales have greatly increased in WA over the last several years but dipped from 2016 to 2017.
Your own link shows an across the board drop in 2017 and calls it the Trump Slump with a

"From a myopic view, however, gun sale statistics for 2017 present an interesting anomaly. Estimated gun sales actually declined by over 11% nationwide in 2017. It’s the third largest year-over-year decline in sales since the NICS was implemented."

Quote:
Bankruptcy doesn't actually mean a business stops selling products. It can mean a restructuring. If they go out of business then creditors might not be able to get their money back.
It says something to the health of the industry.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 07:52 AM   #28
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
This is what I was looking for but others were unwilling to provide.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/2052

Quote:
(5) Consumer productThe term “consumer product” means any article, or component part thereof, produced or distributed .... but such term does not include—
(A) any article which is not customarily produced or distributed for sale to, or use or consumption by, or enjoyment of, a consumer,
(B) tobacco and tobacco products,
(C) motor vehicles....
(D) pesticides ....
(E) any article which, if sold by the manufacturer, producer, or importer, would be subject to the tax imposed by section 4181 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 [26 U.S.C. 4181] (determined without regard to any exemptions from such tax provided by section 4182 or 4221, or any other provision of such Code), or any component of any such article,
(F) aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, or appliances (as defined in section 40102(a) of title 49),
(G) boats which could be subjected to safety regulation under chapter 43 of title 46;....
(H) drugs, devices, or cosmetics (as such terms are defined in sections 201(g), (h), and (i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ....
(I) food. ....
All of the products that the CPSA does not regulate are covered by other laws. Given that the BATFE has so much authority over guns, recalls should be one of them.

Gun recalls would be on topic if they were part of the initiative in the original post; but they're not.

Last edited by Ranb; 3rd May 2018 at 07:54 AM.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 08:24 AM   #29
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
All of the products that the CPSA does not regulate are covered by other laws. Given that the BATFE has so much authority over guns, recalls should be one of them.
No one wants guns to be effectively regulated though the laws hamstringing the BATFE are quite clear in that regard.

And we see here the way it always seems people are for some kind of universal background check and yet never for any law that does it. It is that people like it in theory but in practice it would be too much of a hassle and are willing to deal with the consequences.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 10:31 AM   #30
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
And we see here the way it always seems people are for some kind of universal background check and yet never for any law that does it. It is that people like it in theory but in practice it would be too much of a hassle and are willing to deal with the consequences.
Can you show me a bill that requires bkgd checks for all gun sales to unlicensed persons but does not over regulate the issue to the point where a bkgd check is required to just hold a gun in your hand or reside with a gun owner you are not related to?

WA's I-594 went way overboard in that manner. It was not just bkgd checks for gun sales. For a while it was a potential felony just to hold and/or shoot a friend's gun at a rifle range unless the friend got a bkgd check prior to shooting the gun and the owner got a bkgd check prior to taking the gun back.

People say they want universal bkgd checks and the bills they get are like the garbage that was I-594.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd May 2018, 09:40 PM   #31
mgidm86
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 5,411
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Just move to VA, then you don't even need a license to carry concealed. A true gun owners paradise.
I wonder what happens when everyone is carrying a gun? Kinda meaningless at that point.

"Hey how about we all drop our guns and get rid of the several pounds of dead weight hangin' on our belts? Ain't much sense of us all carrying one, may as well nobody have one! Can I get a 'yeehaw'?"

Someone above compared regulating alcohol and tobackie with guns, but y'all forget about that second amendment thing. Y'ain't got no right to get poop-faced.
__________________
Franklin understands certain kickbacks you obtain unfairly are legal liabilities; however, a risky deed's almost never detrimental despite extra external pressures.

Last edited by mgidm86; 3rd May 2018 at 09:41 PM. Reason: changed a word to void autocensor cuz I don't like to cuss here. Bitches.
mgidm86 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th May 2018, 07:43 AM   #32
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
More about the proposed definition of an assault rifle.

"Semiautomatic assault rifle” means any rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge."

This would make any non-antique semi-auto rifle an assault weapon including the Ruger 10/22 and Marlin Model 60. It would also exclude rifles like the AR-10 and AR-15 made in 1969 and earlier.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2018, 04:07 AM   #33
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 46,729
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
Can you show me a bill that requires bkgd checks for all gun sales to unlicensed persons but does not over regulate the issue to the point where a bkgd check is required to just hold a gun in your hand or reside with a gun owner you are not related to?
Then write one. This is why all gun owners who supposedly support universal background checks are all talk and when push comes to shove don't care. They would never and agree upon any kind of regulatory methodology to make it happen.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2018, 09:33 AM   #34
Joe Random
Graduate Poster
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,951
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
More about the proposed definition of an assault rifle.

"Semiautomatic assault rifle” means any rifle which utilizes a portion of the energy of a firing cartridge to extract the fired cartridge case and chamber the next round, and which requires a separate pull of the trigger to fire each cartridge."

This would make any non-antique semi-auto rifle an assault weapon including the Ruger 10/22 and Marlin Model 60. It would also exclude rifles like the AR-10 and AR-15 made in 1969 and earlier.

Curious why they took the step of defining all semi-autos as 'assault rifles', rather than just applying the proposed legislation to semis directly. Would defining all semis as assault rifles get other, currently existing legislation to apply to them as well?
Joe Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2018, 03:25 PM   #35
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Then write one. This is why all gun owners who supposedly support universal background checks are all talk and when push comes to shove don't care. They would never and agree upon any kind of regulatory methodology to make it happen.
Why do you think I'm not taking any action at all? I talk about gun control all the time on this forum and I usually include those times when I'm able to talk to the politicians who write the law.

I sent my recommendations to the WAGR. Turns out they seem to be rather xenophobic. They didn't really want my input and when they promised me answers to questions I had about why they wrote I-594 the way they did, they never got around to giving any.

I've also given input to Jinkins, Kline and am trying to talk to Kilmer. While the state level politicians are willing to at least listen, talking to Kilmer (my rep in DC) is like talking to a brick wall that has an aide standing in front of it that tells lies.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th May 2018, 03:29 PM   #36
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
Originally Posted by Joe Random View Post
Curious why they took the step of defining all semi-autos as 'assault rifles', rather than just applying the proposed legislation to semis directly. Would defining all semis as assault rifles get other, currently existing legislation to apply to them as well?
I think it has to do with perception. If they want to more strictly regulate semi-auto rifles, then all of a sudden they're going after grandfather's guns. If they label them as assault rifles, then they're going after those military grade murder machines that no civilian really wants to own unless they're a gun nut.

I thought this would be obvious seeing as how the label "assault weapon" is so carelessly thrown around these days.

Last edited by Ranb; 7th May 2018 at 03:33 PM.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th May 2018, 03:51 PM   #37
BrooklynBaby
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 842
Boy are the leftists going to be surprised when they find out we are not going to be giving up our guns. The Constitution is very clear, and is on our side.
BrooklynBaby is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th May 2018, 10:54 PM   #38
Ranb
Philosopher
 
Ranb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: WA USA
Posts: 9,765
There is nothing in this propose initiative that is related to banning guns other than for those adults that have not reached the age of 21.
Ranb is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th May 2018, 11:22 PM   #39
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
.......I guess some adults just aren't supposed to enjoy their civil rights...............
You're talking about all the adults shot dead who wouldn't have been shot dead in a more normal society, right?
__________________
"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th May 2018, 01:22 AM   #40
BrooklynBaby
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 842
Originally Posted by Ranb View Post
There is nothing in this propose initiative that is related to banning guns other than for those adults that have not reached the age of 21.
So, will the draft age be raised to 21 to support the silly notion that the primary age group that has fought most of our wars can't be trusted with guns? Oh, and banning firearms that can be effectively used in a militia is most certainly Unconstitutional.
BrooklynBaby is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:35 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.