# Looking for input on P.O.F.A.P. law



## whitetailassassin (Oct 16, 2012)

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

The following came to mind when discussing how to keep guns out of the wrong hands with a fellow M-S member. Input is greatly appreciated! 

What if it was mandatory the everyone who is not allowed to buy or possess firearms had a "P.O.F.A.P." endorsment of their drivers license or state I.D.? (P)ossession (O)f (F)irearms (P)rohibited... This in and of itself would monumentally reduce any loopholes they may try to exploit, and private party sales would be stopped by good gun owners who simply require proof from purchasers that they may legally possess firearms prior to making the sale.... I would really like some feedback on this idea, and if it sounds reasonable to fellow M-S members I will be including it in my weekly emails to senators and congress.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

whitetailassassin said:


> posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
> 
> The following came to mind when discussing how to keep guns out of the wrong hands with a fellow M-S member. Input is greatly appreciated!
> 
> ...


Sounds good to me.


----------



## kjones734 (Jan 14, 2011)

sounds simple and easy to me, just like they put your license vertical before the age of 21, it is a fast and easy way to show that someone is not allowed to have alcohol. or the little heart symbol to show your a donor. they could place a small symbol on your lisence that shows that you are either a convicted felon or a person deemed mentally ill and not allowed to possess a firearm. 

the only thing I see people complaining about with this idea is people will claim it will be used to discriminate the group of people that have this mark. ( getting jobs, loans.........) 

I am in favor of it though, it would help the average person prevent a sale of a firearm to a felon, how do I really know that person is not supposed to own a gun? ask him? I bet he wont tell me the truth. :lol:


----------



## buckslayer54 (Feb 18, 2013)

Stop stop stop! We here on MS all know that the only way to control guns is to outlaw them hahaha. I really like the idea that you have come up with. Far better than anything Di Fi has put together.


----------



## whitetailassassin (Oct 16, 2012)

Let me also clarify that this proposal would only be applied to those that under CURRENT laws are prohibited from owning or possessing firearms.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## dead short (Sep 15, 2009)

That sure would make checking hunters more interesting. Especially the convicted felons. 


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

How about a forehead tatoo that says felon just in case they forget their ID?


----------



## plugger (Aug 8, 2001)

I was thinking the same thng.


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

whitetailassassin said:


> Let me also clarify that this proposal would only be applied to those that under CURRENT laws are prohibited from owning or possessing firearms.
> 
> posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


Definitely go for it. Let us know how it is received and the responses you get.


----------



## WoW. (Aug 11, 2011)

I am opposed to any code on a drivers license having anything to do with firearms.

That said, if it was info that was obtained by scanning ONLY, then it may not be such a bad idea.


----------



## miruss (Apr 18, 2003)

WoW. said:


> I am opposed to any code on a drivers license having anything to do with firearms.
> 
> That said, if it was info that was obtained by scanning ONLY, then it may not be such a bad idea.


with scanning only that doesn't help when you sell to a neighbor,OR thru local paper. This way when you sell one make copy of lic good to go. OR make this program voluntary,if you don't have this on your lic or have a current CPL must have the check call thru the FBI like at the ffl dealers


----------



## whitetailassassin (Oct 16, 2012)

miruss said:


> with scanning only that doesn't help when you sell to a neighbor,OR thru local paper. This way when you sell one make copy of lic good to go. OR make this program voluntary,if you don't have this on your lic or have a current CPL must have the check call thru the FBI like at the ffl dealers


I don't like that idea because the whole purpose is to acknowledge those who cannot legally obtain or possess, not identify those who can.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Rooster Cogburn (Nov 5, 2007)

Hat's off to you for your suggestion, but it would only apply to individuals with a driver's license. So, either the bad guys could simply say they do not have a driver's license when they go to purchase from a private individual, or would we make it illegal for folks without a driver's license to purchase from a private individual. 

After reading an article in American Rifleman magazine I received in today's mail detailing the federal laws and harsh penalties already in place dealing with this subject...the solutions are already in place.

How about requiring the government to enforce those current laws and penalties first before adding more laws?


----------



## miruss (Apr 18, 2003)

whitetailassassin said:


> I don't like that idea because the whole purpose is to acknowledge those who cannot legally obtain or possess, not identify those who can.
> 
> posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


But who are you acknowledging that to people that sell firearms to. there has to be a way to opt out for people that don't want this to be seen on there lic and with scanning only that defeats the purpose because not everyone has a scanner . As Magnet said in other thread he dosn't want it on his lic where everyone can see


----------



## ENCORE (Sep 19, 2005)

You will NEVER please and or get everyone to agree, PERIOD. Now lets take a realistic look at the CCW. No one complains that it has ones photo or that finger prints and a background check are required. How's that so much different?

I think most will agree that its the nut cases OR those already deemed unfit for a reason, creating most of the problems. What's wrong with identifying them and preventing them from purchasing? It wouldn't infringe on anyone who is legally able to purchase.....

Those without a drivers license would have to get off their ask and get a State ID.

I can deal with it........


----------



## Tubby (Oct 14, 2012)

I'm against background checks for firearms. I'd rather live in dangerous freedom than peaceful tyranny.


----------



## Quack Addict (Aug 10, 2006)

whitetailassassin said:


> I don't like that idea because the whole purpose is to acknowledge those who cannot legally obtain or possess, not identify those who can.


A person has to earn the privilege to be prohibited from the right to keep & bear arms. If such privilege is earned, let the person wear the award like a badge of honor. 



Criminals prefer unarmed victims


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

Tubby said:


> *I'm against background checks for firearms.* I'd rather live in dangerous freedom than peaceful tyranny.


Huh?


----------



## Tubby (Oct 14, 2012)

Background checks don't serve any purpose except it keeps honest people honest and creates a black market arms trade. I'm more of a purist with the Second Amendment in that if someone is not incarcerated, they are a free man and should not be prevented from owning or bearing firearms. A background check doesn't create a safer society. It's a false sense of security. Prior to 1968, there were no background checks for firearms. We got along just fine without them.


----------



## ENCORE (Sep 19, 2005)

Tubby said:


> Background checks don't serve any purpose except it keeps honest people honest and creates a black market arms trade. I'm more of a purist with the Second Amendment in that if someone is not incarcerated, they are a free man and should not be prevented from owning or bearing firearms. A background check doesn't create a safer society. It's a false sense of security. Prior to 1968, there were no background checks for firearms. We got along just fine without them.


Wait a minute........ Things weren't the same prior to 1968, having been born long before then.

So your reasoning is, that if someone committed a homicide, rape or multiples, once he's released from incarceration that he should be allowed to own and possess firearms as a "free man"? No chance of him becoming a "repeat offender"?

Every day of our lives we live in a "false sense of security". Sooner or later society will demand and require itself to look at ALL contributing factors. Its much smarter to review them now, prepare and enact those that best benefit the truely "free man" to own and possess. You either act now to defend your right or, let those who want to take that right away, organize to the level that we make it easy for them to do it.


----------



## Jim..47 (May 5, 2009)

Rooster Cogburn said:


> Hat's off to you for your suggestion, but it would only apply to individuals with a driver's license. So, either the bad guys could simply say they do not have a driver's license when they go to purchase from a private individual, or would we make it illegal for folks without a driver's license to purchase from a private individual.
> 
> After reading an article in American Rifleman magazine I received in today's mail detailing the federal laws and harsh penalties already in place dealing with this subject...the solutions are already in place.
> 
> How about requiring the government to enforce those current laws and penalties first before adding more laws?



If they don't have a drivers license they are required to have a state ID card, looks the same as a license.


----------

