A very interesting article popped up in my newsfeed this week from New York, and it made me think. You read stories about the "assault on the 2nd amendment" and how people fear that "they" are coming for your guns, but is that already happening?
Many of our customers have extensive collections of firearms, from .22 pistols, to .50 cal Barrett's, not to mention copious amounts of ammunition. But how many guns is to many? 2, 3, 5, 10, 100, is there such a thing as too many, and if yes, is that an assault on your 2nd amendment rights?
A Mr Guo Shou, 33, of Rego Park New York, came to the attention of the police during an
When it was searched, they found 225lbs of gunpowder, reloading equipment, 14 licensed handguns, which were not properly secured in a safe; two loaded licensed shotguns; one licensed rifle; approximately 45,000 rounds of ammunition for multiple weapons; two Kevlar body armor vests; and six Kevlar armor plates, and he apparently lived within 2 blocks of a school. This resulted in his arrest and being charged with first-degree reckless endangerment and third-degree criminal possession of a weapon.
This raises many questions for me. 17 firearms would appear to not be a vast collection, certainly not in Arizona terms. the 45,000 rounds, whilst somewhat plentiful, again would appear to be something that might cause comment amoungst shooters, would not be something you would expect to goto jail for upto 7 years, something Mr Shou is facing. The 225lbs of gunpowder might raise an eyebrow, but not when considered in conjunction with the reloading equipment.
So what is the issue here? Does the 2nd amendment mean that you should be able to arm yourself with as much weaponry as you choose, and whose rules dictate how you can store them? I would certainly agree that firearms should always be secure, and access restricted, but should that be enforced by law?
We have had a higher than usual denial rate from the NICS recently, would those people if they were at a gun show simply have bought a firearm from a private seller, will they now goto Back page, and make their purchase there, with the seller none the wiser?
The New York case is clearly laughable to us, but is that something which maybe enforced in the future if nothing is done at the initial sale of a firearm to address problems associated with illegal possession of firearms?
What do YOU think? I for one am very happy I live in Arizona not
Read the New York Daily News story here