JohnRich 4 #76 August 26, 2004 QuoteQuoteWhat the hell is an "I'm able to purchase firearm Id"? Hmmm. What's that thing the state of California made me get before I could buy guns there? Your California card is redundant, since each purchase is checked against a national database anyway. Therefore, no one should need a special card. The FBI personally approves every gun purchase at a gun shop. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #77 August 26, 2004 QuoteSo in this instance a state or federal firearm ID could have helped. Assuming of course that the buyer who was using a welfare ID would not qualify for an official firearm ID in the first place. I'm assuming that the welfare I.D. is a picture I.D. That's just to positively identify the person as being who he really is. Then from that info, a check is run against a national FBI database. A state card adds nothing, since all the state data is already in the national database. QuoteIsn't selling a gun to a criminal a crime? Didn't the welfare dude sell to a criminal? Bingo! That's a point I made many posts back. The BATF had even traced a crime gun back to the criminal previously. Yet no one bothered to prosecute him, monitor him, or disqualify him from future purchases. So law enforcement's failure to act, is what makes the gun shop responsible? I don't think so... QuoteI was under the impression that I would need to get a firearm ID here in Massachusetts before I could purchase/own a gun. Is my MA drivers license enough? Mass. Gun Laws Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #78 August 27, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhat the hell is an "I'm able to purchase firearm Id"? Hmmm. What's that thing the state of California made me get before I could buy guns there? Your California card is redundant, since each purchase is checked against a national database anyway. Therefore, no one should need a special card. The FBI personally approves every gun purchase at a gun shop. AND every purchase from a federally licensed firearms dealer at a gun SHOW. --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cruzit 0 #79 August 27, 2004 The standard for civil liability is much less than for a criminal conviction. It looks to me as if the lawyers in this case sued where they knew they could get the most money. Obviously a guy on welfare would not be able to pay up in a settlement. So instead, they go for the guy who owns a profitable business and who most likely has insurance. Oh wow!!! I just made my first foray into the Speaker's Corner. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #80 August 27, 2004 QuoteOh wow!!! I just made my first foray into the Speaker's Corner. On a gun thread no less! I think you should have to buy double BEER!! --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #81 August 27, 2004 QuoteSo in this instance a state or federal firearm ID could have helped. Assuming of course that the buyer who was using a welfare ID would not qualify for an official firearm ID in the first place. How would the state FOID have helped? (Illinois requires every gun owner have a Firearm Owners Ident) The FBI and ATF ad no problem with him buying, as evidenced by his passing a NICS check. QuoteIsn't selling a gun to a criminal a crime? Didn't the welfare dude sell to a criminal? Doesn't that mean he committed a crime and he is now a criminal? So, he shouldn't have been able to purchase the gun in the first place. If there was some method of tracking purchases there would be potential for his ID to be rejected. And that's where the straw buyer (a guy who purchases with intent to resell w/o notifying the dealer) should have been identified, arrested, prosecuted, and jailed. There is a method of tracing every FFL gun purchase (Federal Firearms License - what every gun dealer must have). The ATF does it on a regular basis. (and anti-gun people misuse that information on a regular basis) QuoteI don't own a gun, not because I'm against owning guns, I just don't need one. I was under the impression that I would need to get a firearm ID here in Massachusetts before I could purchase/own a gun. Is my MA drivers license enough? Some states to require FOID type cards. They provide no beneficial effects, other than (A) a tax on gun buyers, (B) a convenient list of people to harass when bad things happen, and (C) a convenient list when the state goverment decides to confiscate guns. In most states, however, a drivers license, an SS number, and a little personal information is all you need to buy a gun (other than cash or credit ).witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #82 August 27, 2004 QuoteAnd for the record, Tom, I don't bait Ron. I just throw the bait out there. Ron just happens to jump all over it thats Bullshit!!!!"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #83 August 27, 2004 Quotehurt themselves That is the big difference. I am sure if this guy bought the gun sold it to a drug dealer and the drug dealer shot himself with it, there would not be a lawsuit. Now let's say a dz owner knowingly let's a guy jump out of his plane wearing a base rig. Parachute doesn't open and this guy bounces in some ones house, killing a 10 year old watching telletubbies. I'll bet you the dz owner will end up having to pay quite a bit of money, don't you think? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #84 August 27, 2004 QuoteNow let's say a dz owner knowingly let's a guy jump out of his plane wearing a base rig. Parachute doesn't open and this guy bounces in some ones house, killing a 10 year old watching telletubbies. I'll bet you the dz owner will end up having to pay quite a bit of money, don't you think? Why? A BASE rig is far _more_ likely to open than a skydiving rig. How did the DZO contribute to the terminal impact by allowing a rig that was orders of magnitude less likely (as in, it's never happened with modern gear) to experience this malfunction?-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #85 August 27, 2004 Lets say a homemade Base rig. I know a few people that have/are attempting to homebuild scary gear. DZO allowed a non TSO rig to be availible when the law clearly states that it has to be a legal rig Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
