Because fingerprinting is a search. Albeit a different and "less intrusive" type of search, but a search nonetheless. As such, their use has to comport with the 4th Amendment, and the government requiring citizens submit to a search to use their own property is pretty intrusive.

How is it not possible on a gun?

I think you underestimate all gun guys. There are people on this site who defend the Bundys who literally steal from the government.

Would it be only felony assault or would misdemeanor assault get you on the no guns list?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

We've gone over that.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

For the same reason we banned fully automatic weapons.

Guns don't have an expectation of being "innocent until proven guilty".

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

I'm not sure of the law here but I thought assault with a deadly weapon was a felony? I could be wrong.
That kid had held a gun to someone's head at one point. He's also the perp in several domestic violence calls. I would support that info being part of his nics profile. He should not have been allowed to buy a gun, handgun revolver assault weapon... whatever.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

No. You've made the same bullshit excuses about "the technology isn't perfect" that I can get from listening to anybody who is a professional 2A talking head.

You didn't answer the question. I'm talking about the purchase of a gun. Nobody thinks it is realistic to go door to door making people register their weapons and taking away the ones we don't like.

Ok. So you think it's ok to outfit imperfect technology onto firearms. Perhaps you are a 2a "talking head" and don't know it... lol.
I think you know precisely why and you understand but you're just trying to pick a fight with me. Not biting.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

I would too but I think you'll get a lot of resistance about including things that don't result in a conviction.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

If I've established my identity with the FOID card... what purpose would the additional fingerprint serve?
Now I say that as someone who has willingly given my fingerprints to the ISP.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

No I get what your talking point is. I understand why you are saying that. It's the same bullshit we get every time something like this happens.

In the past "well that would be great, but the technology doesn't exist"
Current day "well it exists but it isn't perfected yet"
Future "well they perfected it, but... (whatever the new excuse is)

It's the same "too soon" crap we get. It's just an excuse to never do anything.

I think you know that and you understand but you just don't give a fuck because guns.

That's just it though... He was never actually arrested for his crimes. To me, this is a failure on the police, the school, the parents, the local DA and the perp before it's a failure of laws that don't exist yet.
In other words had the law as written been followed he shouldn't have been able to buy.
That's upsetting.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

Isn't the saying "Why is it an issue if you have nothing to hide"?
Now I say that as somebody who has willingly given my fingerprints to the DoD.

When it comes to life and death yes sir the technology should be perfect before it's deployed or mandated. Until fingerprint scans are instant and 100% reliable they shouldn't be o n guns.
Also... your mythological fingerprint scanner doesn't stop most of these shootings. Cruz would have been able to activate his just fine. He never should have had the gun in the first place.
We apparently disagree. I'm fine with that.
I imagine if you'd put away your blind anger and hate you would find that there is plenty of common ground for plus to stand on in this topic.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

That's not or has ever been my motto. I'm very much against that. I'll never say that. In fact I've had that conversation in the past on this board. I always say something to the effect of "well if you've got nothing to hide can I search your wife's underwater drawer?" Or something like that.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

I don't have blind anger. I have no tolerance for canned bullshit

As for Cruz, so you're saying that there should be tighter restrictions on who can have guns? Doesn't that go against the 2A?

If you would like to wait for the never gonna be close enough "perfection" that's fine. How about this. Back to the fingerprinting. I've already stated that any transactions up to this point we can't go back and have a do over. Going forward. Every transaction is printed and registered to the new owner. Anything happens with that gun, unless you have reported it stolen to the ISP, that's on you. You ok with that one?

Try to learn some tolerance or perhaps redefine what you consider canned bullshit. A hint is that canned bullshit isn't necessarily something that you oppose.


Tighter? Not necessarily. For him to have been restricted wouldn't have required tighter controls. Simply would have required following current in place legislation. And no, that wouldn't go against the 2A.


Yeah ok. I'm not terribly happy with registration per se but I'm willing to go along.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

100% honest question...

When this is your first contribution to a thread, what is the trigger? Like, what is going on upstairs? Do you black out and not remember it? Is it in a fit of rage? Or do you have an inner monologue that just sounds too friendly? Are you typing these things and reading them back to yourself in the voice of a relaxed Australian man, thus making it impossible for you to conceptualize the hostility you are projecting?

_________________

Scrolls back through the thread...



Yes. This is man I should take seriously about their first post in a thread.

I thought I did: Requiring a search to operate your own property is pretty intrusive, that is what makes the fingerprinting to use a gun different than requiring fingerprinting for a security clearance or job in law enforcement or concealed carry permit where such thing is required by law.

What's more, you have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms, making a government mandated insertion of a search every time you wish to engage in your right which "shall not be infringed" even more suspect. You do not have such a right to a job in law enforcement or security clearance.

If I can disable it for the track, sure. Many cars already have electronically limited top speed.

You and I already did this dance. Did you expect my answer to change?

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

Like I've said several times. The devotion to Heller like it's the book of Matthew is pretty scary

No you can't disable it.
You don't need to go to the track.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

Serious question, why is the line fully automatic? I'm not attempting a gotcha or anything but doesn't the government have them? How could a well regulated militia stand up to that?

I think Ogie and others have made the argument that people need to have guns good enough to fend off the government. So why the line at fully automatic?

A kid in my daughter's district brought a replica toy gun on the bus today. Just got a robo call.

I also have a serious question for the group.

What does "well regulated" mean? I mean, in the terms of the second amendment.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

I hope you responded "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!".

_________________