Changes We Need.

[THE BRONZE]

Here are a few changes I would like to see in our current laws effecting weapons.
1. Trash the

[Moose]

It seems that there are too many gun controls already on the books and for the most part nothing is being done to enforce them. The problem is not with the cops who charge the criminals, it's the judges and attorneys who wheel-and-deal charges away like a bad hand in 5 card stud poker.
There also seems to be an ongoing social outcry by a select few that assume that the public will be safer once all guns are banned for life by all persons. My questions is who is going to protect us as citizens when law enforcement is off-duty or there are only 2 officers that may cover one or two counties during the 11-7 shift? I know this is for real for I am a police officer and I know that same reality exsist in this county but not in my agency.
Is your local government going to spend the money to hire one-hundred extra officers or whatever the number may be to patrol the neighborhoods or secluded backwoods area where people may live? And what about the department of Justice, who is backing the current Clinton administrastion? Are they going to spend the money to provide additional federal and local police to assist where you live?
The states/cities/local governments that know restrict gun ownership by private citizens, have they hired additional officers to make you feel more secure in your home or neighborhood, or when you travel?
Why haven't local groups or citizens brought class actions law suits against state/federal or local governments who have passed such laws prohibiting gun ownership by law abiding citizens? They take our right away to protect ourselves and they do nothing to increase law enforcement to ensure our tranquility? But then they would have to raise taxes, your taxes! Think about!
Grass roots organizations may want to consider this as another way to bring attention to the law makers by sueing them for not providing ample police protection.

[Mack811]

Bronze,

1. "assault rifles" I agree. My post ban PC AR-15 is no more or less lethal than my pre ban shorty with all the evil features. The M14 was the last rifle we had that was worth hanging a bayonet on anyway.
2.Domestic violence...I see your point about misdemeanor convictions but I think habitual offenders should qualify.Not in total agreement on this one.
3. Instant background checks and prosecution of prohibited buyers. Isn't that what is supposed to happen? What was all that Brady bill bragging I heard? Guess the government is content to use our tax dollars to buy back stolen guns in the projects.I'm with you.
4.Nation wide carry for LEO. 100%.The more good guys with guns the better.
5.Identification.A bit too "1984" for me.I see your point and it makes sense but the USG makes me nervous enough.Oh well, my prints are on file all over the place already.With technology developing as it is I'm sure it is just a matter of time.(what is in the magnetic strip on the back of my DL? Do you hear helicopters? who is Nite shift REALLY?) http://www.officer.com/ubb/smile.gif Realized I was sounding paranoid there for a minute.

[THE BRONZE]

Hey Mack, do you think it would solve the problem on number 2 if being a habitual domestic violence offender qualified as a felony? As for #3, I don

[Mack811]

I think domestic violence offenders have serious self control issues.One strike, your'e out.People that can not maintain in thier own home do not need to be armed.Remember some poor coppers going to have to come deal with them at some point.I'm sure you have been there.
On the identification topic, I am a bit suprised by the amount of bogus ID out there.I had quite a collection of altered ID that I aquired while working part time security at a night club.Then I found my step daughters fake ID in the laundry, it was computer generated and quite good.(I gave it back to her in little pieces on her 21st birthday)So having thought about it furthur I agree with more detailed ID.
Remember, just 'cause your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

[vampire13r]

That's fine until your disgruntled ex-wife accuses you for spite and because you now have a weapons ban against you you can no longer be a Police Officer. You won't be the first.

[Mack811]

The disgruntled Mrs. Macks are all well in the past, statute of limitations and all, and I never gave them reason to claim DV anyway.I admit that I bring a personal bias towards family violence due to past experiences.If someone allows himself to be in a relationship where the threat of a false accusation is even remotely present, that person should re-evaluate his character judgement skills.If one can not maintain the peace in his own home what will he do on the street?

[THE BRONZE]

Don't forget, a fight with a sibling also counts as domestic violence.

------------------
Jim

[THE BRONZE]

Vampire raised a good point. An acquaintance of mine divorced his wife after he found out about her extra-marital activities. Unfortunately, he had to deal with her on a weekly basis when picking up his son. After she lost a request in court for more child support, she took out a warrant on him for assault. She said he slapped her while dropping his son off. There were no witnesses, so it was her word against his. At the district court level, the judge believed her, and found him guilty. He has quite a gun collection, so rather than accept the verdict, he has appealed to superior court. This happened after the bill passed, so he knew what was at stake. But the law is retroactive. How many people plead in to misdemeanor assaults to get it over with before the law was passed? I have a suspicion that if this law goes before the Supreme Court, it will be struck down. BTW, I don

[Dukeboy01]

Enhancing penalties for subsequent Domestic Violence assaults seems fairer to me. First offense is a misdemeanor. It should be treated like any other misdemeanor assault, without any special conditions such as losing your guns. Let's face it, some couples really do have ONE instance of domestic violence, patch things up, and get on with their lives together. It's not fair to penalize somebody for the rest of their life for a misdemeanor mistake. Make second and subsequent assaults felonies, with mandatory minimum sentences and penalty enhancements.

[cpierson1]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by THE BRONZE:
After she lost a request in court for more child support, she took out a warrant on him for assault.

Heck, she didn't even have to take out the warrant. All someone needs to turn a law abiding gun owner into a "death weilding felon" is a temporary protective order. Then, it's a FEDERAL offense. Nice trick, huh? Really want to get back at someone you know who owns guns? Run down to the local courthouse, and ask for a TPO. They become a felon for just being around a gun, without a trial, jury, or due process, only the word of a jilted lover.

[vampire13r]

When I was with the VA we had positions for officers who were not armed. I was able to employ several officers who had lost thier jobs because of weapons bans. Admittedly one had a behavior problem but nationwide domestic violence laws have probably cost a lot of good cops thier jobs. So be careful what you wish for.

[THE BRONZE]

It really surprised me the bill passed without any warning from the normal groups. I think it caught a lot of people off guard.

------------------
Jim