Liberty wrote: ↑Fri Jan 11, 2019 9:22 am
It's pretty silly, and much of it unenforceable. Guns typically don't have titles. Those of us who are married typically have joint ownership of all our property. Our guns belong to our spouses as much as they do ourselves. Restricting inlaws differently than blood just doesn't make sense.
Restricting folks from relocating our guns creates a hazard. Having someone take temporary custody of our guns, during construction projects or absences away from our homes will expose them to theft. Most gun owners are proud law-abiding citizens, but laws like this will just make more of us criminals when while we are just trying to to be responsible.
This is a thinly disguised bill designed to facilitate forced registration and tracking of all our weapons. It is onerous in that it doesn't just limit the transfer of ownership,
but limits the access of arms to every citizen. Particularly for those who may find them most in need of protection.
Are you saying that it infringes?
Seriously, this is a solution looking for a problem to solve. There is not a shred of published evidence that any of the items covered by this bill contribute to any of our current problems. Straw purchases, which are already illegal and rarely prosecuted are much more of a factor. I wish that we could come to the conclusion that a bill like this would never become law. The fact that we cannot is a sad statement about the willingness of our elected representatives to preserve our guaranteed rights.