Before I bother pawing over the internet, maybe one of you faggots know.
I've been halfheartedly curious about American gun laws. I realize and recognize that when it comes to regulations like from the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, those change with the direction of the wind.
However, I'm curious where I would go to learn all that I can that's involved in the legal ownership and possession of guns, the local and state rules and laws and regulations of the guns, the federal laws regarding guns..
Are there any books you'd recommend about them? Preferably without "Obummer is a muslum an' wants to take yur guuuuuuuns!" propaganda?
I would like to educate myself on what I can and can't do, the laws, the structure of the laws, the government agencies involved in it all and more. If anybody knows.
If it helps, I live in the state of Maine, so federal and Maine law would be most helpful.
Read the actual laws on their respective government pages
>>29921567
What about regulations?
Are laws and regulations held in the same places?
>>29921524
It's not propaganda when it's true faggot.
>>29921579
Code of federal regulations
State code
Regional- county or municipal code
>>29921524
read title 18 in the US Code. pretty much all of it is gun laws.
otherwise, there are only a few major Acts that affect guns in the US:
1. the national firearms act of 1934
2. the gun control act of 1968
3. the hughes amendment of 1986
4. the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994
5. random state-specific laws, sometimes down to the county and city level.
other than that and some miscellaneous import regulations, there isn't much else to know.
>>29921524
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_law_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Maine
There you go. The image regards concealed carry for residents of each state, but does not address reciprocation.
>>29921614
Could one effectively learn everything about their state and federal government's gun control minutia from that? Like the relationship between mental health services and gun dealerships?
I'm just expecting to be inundated with tome after tome of dry material. So what you're saying to me seems like there's just not a whole lot there.
>>29921624
Reciprocation of permits.
>>29921524
Most states regulate the carry of firearms and weapons in public as well as possession in some way, shape, or form. This is found in your state's criminal code. In your case, that's found here: http://law.justia.com/codes/maine/2015/title-17-a/part-2/chapter-43/ Your state also splits up the list of places where one can and cannot carry across the code, and such laws are found in other laws governing conduct at certain events (labor disputes, for example). I don't feel like tracking all of them down since you're not paying my Westlaw tab, but here's the State Police's website which does list those places: http://www.maine.gov/dps/msp/licenses/weapons_permits.html
Federally, the part of the code you're looking at is here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-44
Those two are the big, substantive pieces of gun law. Most (but not all) of the NFA is found in 18 U.S.C. 44.
For a book on self-defense law, it's hard to get a state-specific law. Massad Ayoob and some lawyer dude co-authored a book, Deadly Force: Understanding Your Right to Self Defense, which is overall pretty good as far as the substantive material goes, though it does have its fair share of stuff I disagree with.
>>29921524
>"Obummer is a muslum an' wants to take yur guuuuuuuns!"
>propaganda
>>29921630
>Could one effectively learn everything about their state and federal government's gun control minutia from that?
No, you would literally have to read all of the relevant codes and laws. My post will cover 99% of cases though.
>Like the relationship between mental health services and gun dealerships?
There isn't one, not directly. You would have to have been judged as incapable or mentally unfit by a judge. Likewise if the SSA reports that you are unable to manage your own affairs, that may impact your ability to buy a gun from a dealer.
There isn't a whole lot to gun laws in the US. it's an intrinsic civil right - so like religion, assembly, voting, and so on, the regulations in place are fairly narrow in scope.
I don't really get what you want out of this. If you are looking to become a gun law expert, go search for case histories and read up on laws at Cornell or maybe go for a JD or something.
For the average person the question boils down to: is this gun legal or can i legally buy a gun?
the answer to both is usually "yes" barring a very narrow set of circumstances where you are either prohibited, or the gun itself is not legal for transfer to you for whatever reason.
>>29921664
I wish to actually know the gun laws of my state and of my federal government to better engage people who are convinced we need more gun laws and regulation to combat criminal behavior that will be criminal behavior whether or not people can legally purchase and carry firearms.
I wish to deprogram some people who can be reached with facts and reason and substantitve laws and proof that some ideas of regulation don't work, or are simply contrary to how humans and people function, and why.
That's all.
I won't convince every "intersectional feminist" who gets chewed through the gears of college and swept up in that cult, but I can nip it in the bud before it starts.
>>29921694
Then start reading
>>29921694
well then read those acts, title 18 section 44, and any maine-specific laws. you would also do well to know some major case history as well.
that being said, you should probably realize that ideologues aren't interested in reasoned debate that may change their perceptions of a topic: their minds are already made up about a topic and they seek evidence to support their opinion about it, even if that evidence is specious at best.
Gun laws in the US largely focused around limiting access to the public for various arms and the context of when they were written and drafted and by whom is just as important if not MORE important than the law itself.
Consider that the 1994 AWB has little to no effect on gun crime at all, and that Columbine occurred in the middle of it. Yet it's pushed as a model for further restrictions.
Consider the appeal that a politician would have if instead of stating that reducing access to guns and restricting carry would reduce crime - that that politician (rightfully) stated that police cannot be everywhere at once and that it is more important that you are disarmed and victimized with fewer defensive options than it is to put a gun in your hands because I saw a dead body once. That a dead victim is morally superior than a survivor of attempted murder.
Consider the mentality where the divorce of personal responsibility isn't a voluntary choice of nonviolence or conscious rejection of violence, but a choice forced upon you by legal requirement - a requirement where people aren't as equal to others because of money, physical ability, or sex. Why should a 100lb woman have no chance to defend from a 300lb man? Why is a disabled man further victimized when his home is broken into by a gang of thieves after his pain medication?
There's the question of property rights as well. Is it just to defend what you have, or is it a fleeting thing where you submit and lose your goods under the hope they are recovered by a police investigation?
>>29921741
I'm aware of this. The problem being that many people who become staunch opponents of gun rights tend to become that way because, yes, of bias. But part of that willful ignorance comes from lies that they're told to support those claims. I know I can't reach people that will look for any proof, no matter how insubstantial, but I can at least show the Flat Earthers the globe and point out the emperor wears no clothes.
Tracing back who drafted the laws and why and getting their quotes on it and about guns is indeed on my agenda of things. Because bad ideas produce bad legislation on bad pretenses to bad outcomes.
>>29921524
>Maine
VA here, this is news to me. I wasn't aware that anyone actually lived there.
Do you have roads? Are there competitions for breeding rights with the females of your tribe. Do many people fall prey to the dock ghosts and skinwalkers?
>>29921786
>but I can at least show the Flat Earthers the globe and point out the emperor wears no clothes.
until they tell you that the globe is a lie, and that the emporer's clothes are INVISIBLE, which is why you need to vote Hillary.
>>29921787
There's a grand total of 1.35 million of us Mainers. Local theorists postulate that Maine citizens are primal ancestors of many Americans, a strain of people before people got fucking schizophrenic and absurd in their politics, which is why we managed to elect an independent Senator (Angus King.) We're 95% white, and we actually have more mixed race people and American Aborigines than black or hispanic people.
We do not compete for mates. Our women tend to choose just who will knock them up, as is their prerogative, and our men are only too happy to apply. Our females tend to be more masculine than men of other states, owing to tall trees making them feel less self-conscious when riding fourwheelers topless and shooting moose that charge. Every spring and summer we hold a competition wherein a male picks his wife or fiance up and races with her, not too dissimilar from the Finish race of the same concept. In order to make it a competition, the women stuff their faces to the point of obesity over the long, cold winter, much to the chagrin of champion runners.
Maine actually voted popularly to legalize gay marriage before the federal government formally recognized it as a national right. We figure anyone who is gay can go stick it in their ass, and it's not our business.
We have roads. They are terrible, because the New England soil hates you. The winter hates you. The ice hates you. The road hates you. Your car hates you, because you probably didn't bother buiding your car a garage, making it sleep outside. And we hate the soil, the ice and the roads back, and our cars can be outside cars for all we care. They act bad, they can be stray cars and we'll get new ones.
>>29921786
>who drafted the laws
usually a rich kid insulated from life until he decided to become a politician and then lived in a mansion and never interacted with anyone from their state.
>why
generally because they are narcissistic and magnanimous and believe they know exactly what's wrong with the world, and the only thing standing between them and bringing glory and peace to the world is gun nuts who live solely to shoot other people and fight the gubmint who are just trying to "help" them
the road to hell is paved with good intentions
>>29921879
Is it illegal to 'expose' drafters of laws? Or interview them?
I should probably state I have no interest or desire to insult people who draft laws, no matter their ideology or bend. I just want to know what they were thinking and what went into the drafting of laws I disagree with.
>>29922001
it isn't - why would it be? it's a public record like any other.
>>29922026
I assumed there was some protections in place in case anyone had the bright idea to harass drafters of laws.
>>29922107
there are already laws against harassment, stalking, et c.
Go read some ACTUAL LAWS and GFTO of /k
>>29921630
>Like the relationship between mental health services and gun dealerships?
Oh, you're anti-gun
That explains not knowing anything
>>29922282
I'm not anti-gun.
>>29921592
dont you ever talk shit to anyone else in my presense. you hear me fucker?
>>29921630
there is actually very little relationship between mental health services and gun dealers
basically, there are only two ways to be disqualified mentally
you can be involuntarily committed to a psychiatric institution or you can be declared mentally incompetent by a judge
either of these disqualifications /should/ be reported to the FBI NCICS department which runs the NICS background check system
often they aren't
all the dealership gets is a pass, fail, or delay, no other information
