Minimum price on guns

I personally think this is a terrible idea. There are such things as thugs with money to spare, I'm certain there are plenty of violent drug dealers with enough money to buy an AR15, something that I don't have.

Actually, no offense, but I think this is about the WORST gun control proposal I've ever heard. The whole microstamping business actually sounds good compared to this.

EDIT: Our gun laws are at about the most effective level they are ever going to reach right now, absolutely NO new gun laws are going to make gun crime decrease significantly. The rabid gun-hating morons in the Anti-gun crowd need to realize this, consider it a job well done for themselves, AND SHUT THE HELL UP.
 
KSFreeman said:
Let's not rush to join Southern legislatures.:mad:
Click to expand...

I wish the Yankee legislature here would rush to join Georgia and do away with this "pink card" nonsense.

Down there, any 18 year-old may drive about with a loaded pistol in his car without having to tug his forelock at his betters at the statehouse...
 
The fallacy of this regulation is that criminals go to your friendly firearms retailer, get their NICs check done and wait three days. The latter two don't work, so why would the price at the store? Besides, if it costs another $400, Slimey Joe will just mug another guy at the ATM before he heads down to Guns R Us for his perfectly legal, retail-price-control-purchased sidearm.

To recite what is all but boilerplate: Any gun regulation is redundant and meaningless to the reduction of crime. Enforce what we have already e.g. don't kill anyone. The roots of violence are a societal problem that is in no way addressed by limiting the devices employed as evidenced by the wildly differing but overwhelmingly unproductive results in gun-restrictive cities, states and nations.
 
I wish the Yankee legislature here would rush to join Georgia and do away with this "pink card" nonsense.
Click to expand...

Now, now, the "Army pistol laws" and "Son of Ham" laws, which were intended to set minimum prices outside the financial means of African-Americans, were all Southern.

An 18 year old may carry a loaded pistol in his car as well up here. He simply needs the license which is the cost of 4 packs of cigarettes. That 18 year old better put down his jug or banjo and get himself a j-o-b.

As for the need for a license, you can blame John Dillinger. He was from Southern Indiana.:p
 
KSFreeman said:
He simply needs the license...
Click to expand...

See "(T)ugging his forelock to his betters in the statehouse..."

Are those pistol licenses sold in the office down the hall from the free speech licenses? :p

I see my plans to own a 14" 870 'entry gun' in Indiana are right out, too, thanks to Johnny D. :o
 
I say, I say, yer betters, I say are in the State Pooooleeeece, but they remain unimpressed.:D

Are those pistol licenses sold in the office down the hall from the free speech licenses?
Click to expand...

No, parade permits applications are on another floor in the City-County building.
 
steam

I find an advanced education seems to make the user turn into a dim wit.since I am much older and have seen much more I think I have a slight edge.I came from a time before the intelectuals got control of the country,and before all the gun control went wild.the 1934 law did not stop the ownership of MGs what it did was tax the guns and registered[bad]them.
the $200 was big money then.but it did not stop any one from getting guns.
as a mater of fact they then stole the guns from police stations.what stopped it was the elimination of the groups.and criminals dont use MGs not because of the price but because that brings federal heat down on them and no one wants them around.there are thousands of unregistered MGs out there.but the people who have them are not the criminals.its not the gus stupid its the criminals.either eliminate them or you have them.it isnot the poor that are the criminals its the people who want something for nothing.
I live barely on my SS and cannot afford the price of the modern guns what I have I got long ago.I hope you rethink you thread before you get to deep in cow-dung :rolleyes::mad::eek:
 
Down there, any 18 year-old may drive about with a loaded pistol
Click to expand...

Not quite, I'm 19 and I cannot buy a handgun until I'm 21. Shotguns and rifles are a different story though. Unless you have a carry permit the only way you can have a loaded gun in your vehicle is if you have it sitting up on the dashboard or somewhere else in plain sight.
 
This whole thing is the stupidest thing I have read on this website. Would that go for used handguns to? And im pretty sure you could go buy a 90 dollar NEF single shot twelve gauge from walmart, cut it down a little bit, and go kill someone just as easily as you could with a hi point. This is America, free market. There is nothing wrong with cheap guns. Nobody wants to throw an 800 dollar gun in their tacklebox when they go fishing. Thats what cheap guns are for! Practical use! If i dropped my .357 on a rock while hiking I would feel it all the way up in my pee pee, If i dropped my hi point I would shrug, pick it up, dust it off, and keep going. The absolute ONLY thing I would say to do is try to crack down on crooked gun dealers, and ask the good ones to use discretion when selling guns
 
Now I'm Almost Worried To Admit...

Where I live, based on some pretty outlandish ideas posted by John. WHY would you even consider setting a minimum price for a firearm? Do you watch the news around here? In any news coverage where they showed the weapons involved in a crime, I have yet to see a Hi Point shown as the bad guy's gun of choice. And you think making a minimum price point for firearms will convince the anti-gun crowd to consider that a compromise that would convince them to go along with removing the restrictions of the 1934 or 1968 gun laws?

The anti-gun crowd sees a compromise as a situation in which gun owners give up some more rights willingly, and the anti-gun side simply takes more control of the issue. Their aim is to remove guns from society, not allow easier access to full auto weapons.

If criminals really wanted full auto weapons, they could as easily buy military surplus re-created guns like an AK or an SKS, and work them over a little to set them to full auto. That would be a lot easier than smuggling in surplus guns already made that way.

Now I don't know what they're teaching you over there at Columbus, but to this Buckeye, it makes no sense to try and force an Ohio company from business on a notion that isn't going to achieve the goals you think it will.

One question: Have you ever shot a Hi Point? I own one as does my son, and I know of many people who own them that certainly aren't criminals, they had a need for a firearm at a time of limited cash flow, and that was the only option available. And the vast majority of those who own them that I know feel they're pretty good guns. If you haven't shot one, let me know, maybe we can set it up for you to try one out, since we both live in the Gem City.
 
I have racked my brain trying to think of firearm regulations I believe would actually work. I am not talking about tougher consequences for illegal actions, but bans or restrictions that might slow down the flow of illegal guns.
Click to expand...

The problem with a floor on gun prices is that it would increase, rather than decrease, the flow of illegal guns. Pick a number - $250, $500, $1,000 - as a floor price and it will limit legal sales of new guns percieved as not being worth that amount. But there are plenty of Lorcins, Ravens, and other inexpensive guns already in the marketplace that will simply be sold illegally. Even without the existing supply of inexpensive guns, there are plenty of cheap guns around the world that could, and would, be illegally imported to meet the demand.
 
Thoughts?

You mean have the government step in and set price controls on the sales price of new firearms?

Doesn't anyone ever take "If the government is the answer, it was a stupid question" to heart?
 
the problem with a floor on gun prices is that it would increase, rather than decrease, the flow of illegal guns.
Click to expand...

Living in a country with very strict guns laws AND high prices for firearms, I totally agree with this. It is significantly cheaper to buy illegal black market stuff than it is to get anything legally here.

The anti-gun crowd sees a compromise as a situation in which gun owners give up some more rights willingly, and the anti-gun side simply takes more control of the issue. Their aim is to remove guns from society, not allow easier access to full auto weapons.
Click to expand...

True also, we only have bolt action and single shot left, and they anti-gun lobby wants them removed as well. Doesn't affect the criminals in the slightest of course.. Pre-firearms ban, prices were significantly cheaper.

From Australia looking over to America, they cant take away your guns because you have your right to bear arms, but they can sure as heck overprice them to stop you buying them legally.
 
Doesn't affect the criminals in the slightest of course.. Pre-firearms ban, prices were significantly cheaper.
Click to expand...


no matter what kinda of "control" you put on firearms themselves, this quote from Telgriff, will always prove to be true. they are called criminals for a reason, they break the law. a minimum price will only serve to fuel the illegal gun market, IMHO. criminals will always have their ways of getting guns, be it through gun runners, b&e or whatever means necessary. a minimum price they will never have to deal with.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I may be wrong (I often am) but I have the impression that some law enforcement officials believe that criminals actually use certain kinds of guns. That is, there are "good guns" and there are "bad guns." That's where the Saturday night special idea comes from. I think I recall a quote referring to a Colt Detective Special where a policeman said they are never involved in shootings. True or not, such photos I've seen of police firearms rooms suggest that all kinds of handguns are used in crime, even including stag handled single actions.

Even if we can't do anything to keep the bad guys from getting their hands on guns (even stag handled ones), perhaps we could do something about good people shooting one another. Then perhaps we could do something about people ignoring the speed limit. Do you suppose raising the speed limit is the answer?
 
FYI

Police evidence "gun rooms" hold guns involved in crimes, not just guns used in the commission of a crime. If your guns are stolen, and then recovered, they will be in the evidence room, until final disposition of the case. In some cases, this can take (literally), years. Your stag handled single action might be phototgraphed many times over months/years while waiting for final disposition. You might get it back, you might not, depending on the jurisidiction, and the judges.

It might wind up in the evidence room because little Jimmy had a bad day and sent a threatening e-mail to someone. Or because Cousin Freddy was in your garage when he sold dope to an undercover cop. Or many other reasons. A gun's use in the hands of a criminal during the commission of a crime is just one of the ways they get into the evidence locker. But, as you noted, the pictures do suggest that.

perhaps we could do something about good people shooting one another.
Click to expand...
No need. Outside of actual accidents (which are rare), good people don't shoot one another.;)
 
When I lived in Illinois, I had an FOID card, so my purchases could be tracked more easily. In California, there was a very long waiting period. In Tennessee, it was a shorter waiting period. In Michigan, until recently, I had to get permission from my local police dept. to purchase a handgun, buy it, return it to the police dept., and wait for a "safety check" to be performed. Now, I merely have to ask, "Please, Sir, may I have some more?" I must also keep my permit-to-purchase paperwork with me for at least a month, even if I don't have the weapon with me, or so I have been "advised."

This reminds me of a story, which I will attempt to relate, probably poorly:
During WWII, a priest was lamenting, "When they came for the Communists, I didn't speak up. When they came for the homosexuals, I didn't speak up. When they came for the Gypsies, Masons, and Jews, I didn't speak up. Now that they've come for me, there's no one left to speak up."

You see, we may not all agree with one another about revolvers v. semi-autos, or 9mm v. .45ACP, or stainless v. blue. We come from different backgrounds, faiths, and philosophies. We can all agree on this, though: WHETHER IT'S A GUN, OR A BOOK, OR A THOUGHT, WHEN SOMEONE TAKES IT AWAY FROM ONE OF US, IT IS TAKEN FROM ALL OF US!

A little over-the-top? Maybe, but totalitarianism seeps in through the cracks of the democracy in which the ruled are distracted when their basic freedoms are being confiscated, rendering them defenseless. See what happened in the last century in Europe and Asia as they were caught between the hammer of communism and the anvil of facism.

OK, the soapbox is straining from the weight, so I guess I'm finished.
 
What kind of elitist jerk would want to make it more difficult or impossible for people on a limited budget to be able to exersise thier Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms, and their God-given right to self-protection?

Maybe we should also limit the First Amendment Rights of the unwashed masses. Let's require that no newspaper be sold for less than $5 an issue, and make typewriters, TVs, radios, and computers all require an expensive annual license.
 
Leave the Free Market alone. It works.

Having a minimum price on anything does not work. Just like raising the minimum wage, everything else goes up with it.

And by the way who would get the remaining $200 when someone pays $300 for a $100 gun? Uncle Sam? They sure need some more of our money.
 
The trouble with free markets and free trade is that they aren't free. The trouble with capitalism is that it is for enriching capitalists. Where does that leave the rest of us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top