Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

reds8n wrote: It's really a constituitional right to drive in California ? WTF ? So, hypothetically speaking, if restrictions were put in place on car usership, say due to oil shortage/enviromental concerns/prices of apples/whatever, this would require a constituitional amendment to pass or it could be challenged ?


What tests do you have to pass to own a gun then ? I was under the impression, with a dim sense that this varied possibly from state to state, that as it was a right there wouldn't be any tests at all. Live and learn I guess.

To own a firearm, you don't have to pass any sort of test, but they do a background check, which you have to pay for ( it is not expensive ). The long and short of it is that you can't have a felony on your record ( or certain misdemeanors inolving domestic violence), you cannot be a habitual alchoholic or drug uses ( I'm guessing that is on the honor code, pretty hard to check that one), and you cannot have been declared "mentally defective" ( how is that for objective and not stigmatizing language). You will be fingerprinted as well.

Hi guys,
first time posting on a forum so please excuse the noob.
As for testing, in California you do have to take a gun safety course (I think only 1 day) or provide proof of military service before you can buy a gun.

Graveyman wrote:Hi guys,
first time posting on a forum so please excuse the noob.
As for testing, in California you do have to take a gun safety course (I think only 1 day) or provide proof of military service before you can buy a gun.

Really? In Tennessee and Colorado ( I've purchased firearms, handguns specifically in those states) to just get the weapon you have a background check. If you want a carry permit, there is more involved, including training, and getting a FFL is an entirely different matter of course.

Grignard wrote:

Graveyman wrote:Hi guys,
first time posting on a forum so please excuse the noob.
As for testing, in California you do have to take a gun safety course (I think only 1 day) or provide proof of military service before you can buy a gun.

Really? In Tennessee and Colorado ( I've purchased firearms, handguns specifically in those states) to just get the weapon you have a background check. If you want a carry permit, there is more involved, including training, and getting a FFL is an entirely different matter of course.

California has a CCW permit, BUT, the application is determined by county and that county's sheriff. For instance in Humboldt County, which is the ass end of California, it would be quite a bit easier to be issued a CCW Permit than say SF, Sac, or LA counties, unless you have a large amount of money, or are a bodyguard to some rich person. Also, in order to purchase a weapon in california the same safety course is required along with a lengthy background check, I think it's 7-14 days.

I find anti-gun, pro-gun control viewpoints detestable. What's even more obtuse than that is people from other countries who I doubt have lived in the US for any length of time. I've grown up all my life hunting ducks, pheasant, chukar, deer, wild pigs since I was about 5 (not in that order either), I was taught how to respect and handle firearms safely.

When seconds count, the police are minutes away. Also, it is not the job of law enforcement to be every US citizen's personal bodyguard.

I apologize for not attempting to get this thread on track.

RIP Mr. Heston, thank you for your service with our country during WW2 also.

What's even more obtuse than that is people from other countries who I doubt have lived in the US for any length of time.

What, just in general ? And then you wonder why you're so disliked abroad.

Can we keep this for Mr Heston? If you want you can take all the pro/anti-gun remarks to another thread where we can all express our feelings.

M.

Good point Miguelsan

I also agree, but I also understand it is easier to turn a person into a single abstract argument then the comprehend the entirety of a humans life. It's simpler to just look at the issue of firearms from one's own limited perspective then to try and view him as a whole person, flaws and all, since odds are most of us never met him or knew him in a meaningful way.

All things being equal I thought he was pretty neat guy.

reds8n wrote:

What's even more obtuse than that is people from other countries who I doubt have lived in the US for any length of time.

What, just in general ? And then you wonder why you're so disliked abroad.

I didn't articulate that correctly, dangit. I apologize for contributing to getting the thread off track.

From my experience, most states involve some sort of nominal background check, sometimes they will actually take a few days to do it. In my home state of Louisiana, once you are age 12 or over, you have to pass a firearm/hunting safety course to actually use anything you own. Before that age, you are basically under the tutelage of your family, so hunting or target shooting w/ your pop is acceptable.


OOPS!! Didn't realize there was a second page !!!

Godspeed Mr. Heston.