PDA

View Full Version : Since we're having this "discussion" now, REPEAL THE WAITING PERIOD!


Nick5811
12-24-2012, 9:47 AM
So here's what I've been thinking:

If a LAW-ABIDING GUN OWNER goes in to the shop and wants to buy a new gun, why should they wait the 10 days to take delivery? If the purpose of the wait is to 'cool off' because I want to kill someone, why wouldn't I just use the gun I already own?

Sure, we still fill out the form, provide our thumb prints, pay the $25 and go through the background check, but the database would show that this person has already purchased a gun previously. No reason to have a waiting period.

They (the GOVERNMENT) have already classified guns into two categories (handguns/long guns) and put age restrictions on them, requiring handgun purchasers to be 21+. This seems to create a hierarchy placing handguns above long guns.

A cop friend and I were discussing this a while back, though we disagreed on a minor difference between two forms of this idea that could work:

I said once you own a gun of the type you are buying, you should be exempt from the waiting period. If you have a handgun, no handgun waiting period. If you have a long gun, no long gun waiting period. I originally thought if you have a handgun already there should be no waiting period for anything since you already have the capability to shoot someone with a handgun. This could be amended to say "or a HIGHER LEVEL category" (if established, as in a handgun which requires higher age, HSC, etc).

My friend disagreed, and said "well what if you want to kill someone from a long distance and all you have is a handgun, or vice versa?"

To address this argument, firearms could be broken into three categories (rifle, shotgun, handgun) and exempt a person after lawful purchase/ownership of a firearm in that category.


This absolutely irritates me since I can have a gun in my hand, with a box of rounds at a shop/range and still have to wait an additional 10 24-hour periods to buy and shoot another one.

Thoughts? Suggestions to get something like this enacted now that we're 'having the national discussion on firearms'?

wildhawker
12-24-2012, 10:00 AM
See: Silvester v. Harris.

Root66
12-24-2012, 2:12 PM
The wait is a punishment, not a "cooling off period".

Rackatak
12-24-2012, 2:37 PM
So here's what I've been thinking:

If a LAW-ABIDING GUN OWNER goes in to the shop and wants to buy a new gun, why should they wait the 10 days to take delivery? If the purpose of the wait is to 'cool off' because I want to kill someone, why wouldn't I just use the gun I already own?

Sure, we still fill out the form, provide our thumb prints, pay the $25 and go through the background check, but the database would show that this person has already purchased a gun previously. No reason to have a waiting period.

They (the GOVERNMENT) have already classified guns into two categories (handguns/long guns) and put age restrictions on them, requiring handgun purchasers to be 21+. This seems to create a hierarchy placing handguns above long guns.

A cop friend and I were discussing this a while back, though we disagreed on a minor difference between two forms of this idea that could work:

I said once you own a gun of the type you are buying, you should be exempt from the waiting period. If you have a handgun, no handgun waiting period. If you have a long gun, no long gun waiting period. I originally thought if you have a handgun already there should be no waiting period for anything since you already have the capability to shoot someone with a handgun. This could be amended to say "or a HIGHER LEVEL category" (if established, as in a handgun which requires higher age, HSC, etc).

My friend disagreed, and said "well what if you want to kill someone from a long distance and all you have is a handgun, or vice versa?"

To address this argument, firearms could be broken into three categories (rifle, shotgun, handgun) and exempt a person after lawful purchase/ownership of a firearm in that category.


This absolutely irritates me since I can have a gun in my hand, with a box of rounds at a shop/range and still have to wait an additional 10 24-hour periods to buy and shoot another one.

Thoughts? Suggestions to get something like this enacted now that we're 'having the national discussion on firearms'?

The focus should be on preventing any more restrictive gun legislation in California from becoming law. The prospect of repealing any of the current laws is slim to none.

Furthermore, think about what you said,
"If the purpose of the wait is to 'cool off' because I want to kill someone, why wouldn't I just use the gun I already own?"
How does that sound to the gun controllers lurking this site?

The range will still be there in 10 days...

Doheny
12-24-2012, 3:22 PM
/\ well said

JoshuaS
12-24-2012, 3:24 PM
I fully agree with you, and were it possible to actually loosen current restrictions now, pushing for limiting the 10day waiting period to first time buyers, and implementing an "instant" background check would be a good first step. It would certainly be easier to pass than getting rid of the waiting period entirely, and one could argue that the changes would save the state money, and help the enviroment as you would have to drive less!

But while a good idea, unlikely to get enough support in the foreseable future, unless, perhaps, the bill added other restrictions, which would be a no-no. I am all for dealing in the realm of the possible rather than ideal when the compromise means less restriction, but not as much less as would be ideal, but against compromise when it adds new restrictions, especially of new kinds.

I have been thinking about this a lot lately. In and of itself, the HSC, for instance, is not unreasonable or overly burdensome. But someone pointed out to me the problem isn't the test as it stands now, but the principle behind it that the government can set standards besides being a law abiding citizen. If they can do an HSC, while not require actual classes, training and qualification (and if you cannot buy it, hard to get good with it first!). We have to think not just about the restrictions in themselves, but the principles they establish in law and precedent.

wildhawker
12-24-2012, 3:51 PM
For those who didn't want to take the 10 second to google my case cite, click here: http://ia700803.us.archive.org/13/items/gov.uscourts.caed.233362/gov.uscourts.caed.233362.docket.html.

-Brandon

wildhawker
12-24-2012, 3:51 PM
For those who didn't want to take the 10 second to google my case cite, click here: http://ia700803.us.archive.org/13/items/gov.uscourts.caed.233362/gov.uscourts.caed.233362.docket.html.

-Brandon

Nick5811
12-27-2012, 1:44 AM
For those who didn't want to take the 10 second to google my case cite, click here: http://ia700803.us.archive.org/13/items/gov.uscourts.caed.233362/gov.uscourts.caed.233362.docket.html.

-Brandon

I'm assuming this case has something to do with the waiting period being a civil rights violation? I didn't see it listed in your link.



And my point here is that we are supposed to have a national discussion. Fine, lets discuss how tight the gun laws already are, and how they again, only inconvenience law-abiding gun owners. They don't reduce or prevent crime. I'm not calling for complete abdication of all gun restrictions, but lets ask for our rights back instead of allowing them to take more. This way leaving us with what we have seems like a compromise.

My comment about using a gun I already own to commit an act of violence simply demonstrates the fallicy in applying a cooling-off waiting period to a gun purchase by a gun owner. I didn't ask to remove the background check requirement, just the completely useless detention of my personal property.

unusedusername
12-27-2012, 1:53 AM
Considering that the right people are already suing the state using pretty much your exact logic you may want to read the documents linked to by Wildhawker...

(hint: some of the numbers are links that go to the filled court papers)

jcwatchdog
12-27-2012, 2:00 AM
So here's what I've been thinking:

If a LAW-ABIDING GUN OWNER goes in to the shop and wants to buy a new gun, why should they wait the 10 days to take delivery? If the purpose of the wait is to 'cool off' because I want to kill someone, why wouldn't I just use the gun I already own?





While we're at it why not remove the one new handgun every 30 day rule. Are PPT used handguns less dangerous somehow that we can buy more than 1 every 30?

Nick5811
12-27-2012, 4:17 AM
Considering that the right people are already suing the state using pretty much your exact logic you may want to read the documents linked to by Wildhawker...

(hint: some of the numbers are links that go to the filled court papers)

Oh yeah, okay I see it now. The little numbers on the left. I'm glad to hear this, and now I have to donate some money to this cause. I think it's sad that the Atty General is asking the court to order the plaintiffs to pay for HER costs to defend the lawsuit. Weak.