Gun Owners vs Haters

[danielson]

Morality is the missing ingedient in the american pie.. that's for sure.

And background checks do not equal firearm registratio.. if you are not a felon or declared mentally ill, u will pass, as long as they don't confuse you with someone with your name, who is.

There is no reason why someone should be able to go into a gun shop and walk out, gun in hand un checked. That's ridiculous.

 

[zippy23]

Just keep in mind, its the media, they blow it up, make you think its happening everywhere, when in reality crimes are down over the last 10 years. The real issue(i believe) is that our laws are not enforced. The penalties for crimes today are almost pointless. If someone commits a crime, it needs to be known that they will be severly punished for what they did. They sit on death row for 20 years, have appeal and after appeal, its garbage, how many murderers get out in 25 years? If the severity of the punishment was according to the crime, i think there would be less crime. Crime will never go away, but if it was clear the consequences would be swift and severe, less people would be out doing things. Plus if these idiots were MADE to go to work to get their money, there would also be WAY LESS crime.

 

[LarryC]

The ONLY thing that is sure to be accomplished with 100% background checks is that all LEGAL gun owners will now be registering their firearms.

This is not true! The gun is NOT registered when a check is made!

I disagree, when a background check is made (whether it is completed, approved, delayed or accepted, YOUR Name and all the information on the 4473 form MUST BE KEPT BY THE FFL that made the check until he goes out of business. These files are accessible to the ATF at any time. Then when the FFL goes out of business THESE RECORDS MUST BE SENT TO THE ATF. I don't know what you call "registration" - but to me when my name and the gun I purchased is recorded and sent to the ATF, I think it is--- If it looks like a Duck, walks like a Duck and Quacks like a Duck it probably is a DUCK.

 

[LarryC]

IF YOU STOP BACKGROUND CHECKS, THERE WILL BE NO REASON FOR THE CRIMINALS TO OBTAIN THE FIREARMS ILLEGALLY.....

I dont get why this isnt clear....

If you stop background checks, you will be shoulder checking thugs in your local gunshop...

Plus, taking the reason for them to buy illegally, will eliminate the old standby charge of obtaining an illegal firearm... I know everyone's afraid that the government is gonna pull the plug and everyone is gonna go in one day, and be denied... but the fact is, it would be FAR worse, if any ghetto thug, could go into your favorite gun shop, and walk out with a firearm.. How do you think they'd feel about selling a firearm to a thug? ****... No one wants to sell a gun to a criminal....

Why do you think they would be shoulder to shoulder with you? You (I'm assuming) go to the gun shop during their open business hours. The "Thugs" prefer to go in after hours, take what they want and leave. If the gunshop is to well guarded or hard to get into - there is always your house!.

 

[rvb]

IF YOU STOP BACKGROUND CHECKS, THERE WILL BE NO REASON FOR THE CRIMINALS TO OBTAIN THE FIREARMS ILLEGALLY.....

I dont get why this isnt clear....

If you stop background checks, you will be shoulder checking thugs in your local gunshop...

Plus, taking the reason for them to buy illegally, will eliminate the old standby charge of obtaining an illegal firearm... I know everyone's afraid that the government is gonna pull the plug and everyone is gonna go in one day, and be denied... but the fact is, it would be FAR worse, if any ghetto thug, could go into your favorite gun shop, and walk out with a firearm.. How do you think they'd feel about selling a firearm to a thug? ****... No one wants to sell a gun to a criminal....

?? You stand shoulder to shoulder w/ 'thugs' every day... in line at the grocery, seated in the movie theater. I bet people who couldn't pass a nics ARE in the local gunshop w/ you buying ammo, knives, etc. ... even handling the guns so they can later send in their strawman.

If you are all about background checks as a way to increase penalties on violent offenders (by 'forcing' them to do something illegal?*), lets cut out the middle man and INCREASE THE PENALTIES FOR VIOLENT CRIMES.

*really... your logic says it's better to let them break into someone's home, possibly putting innocent folks in danger, to try to steal a gun as a way to increase penalties?????

Do you feel bad about selling the 'thug' a car used as a get-a-way vehicle? Do you feel bad for selling them the crowbar used to smash windows or pry open displays? About selling them a computer used to steal identities? The alcohol used to drink and drive? Where do we draw that line?

You realize these people you don't want buying guns ARE buying them right? they are sending in their girlfriend/baby-mama/cousin/whoever-can-pass-NICS w/ a wad of cash. already illegal. hard to enforce, especially w/o registration.

that feeling you "are doing something to make the world safer" is nothing more than a feeling. emotional. un-rational.

Morality is the missing ingedient in the american pie.. that's for sure.

And background checks do not equal firearm registratio.. if you are not a felon or declared mentally ill, u will pass, as long as they don't confuse you with someone with your name, who is.

There is no reason why someone should be able to go into a gun shop and walk out, gun in hand un checked. That's ridiculous.

The only way mandatory "universal" background checks becomes enforeable is with registration. Even though it's not currently discussed, I can promiss you the next time some looser who wouldnt pass a nics shoots up a school, the "We have to do something" crowd will be clamering to know how he got it, who he got it from, and registration will be the next "loophole" to be closed.... It may already be burried in the current proposed legislation, or the final version before it goes for a vote. Will the "universal" law just require two parties to walk into a shop and the shop runs a nics, and everything is legal? Or will a 4473 be required? via those FFL forms we already have a defacto limited registration.

The only way to know person A sold person B a gun w/o going through a nics is if the gun is REGISTERED to person A.

-rvb

 

[danielson]

I didnt say "we have to do something" Its already been done. I bet you gave the gubment your name and got a lifetime carry permit didnt you... If your willing to let "the man" force you to get a piece of paper that allows you to practice the right you should ALREADY have, why are you *****ing about a 5 minute check to see if your a known criminal or person with a mental illness?

I dont get why You guys(you and some others in more than this thread) are coming at me so hard on this.. A background check to purchase a firearm makes more sense than having to fork over money to the government for you to be able to do what the constitution says. But Your not running around with your hair on fire for that...

Im lost...

 

[LuckyOne]

RobyG78 is spot on! These people are by and large a product of their raising. I won't repeat all they he said but instead give it a HELL YEAH!

As for those willing to give up a little liberty in hopes of a little safety...you deserve neither.

Don't bend, stand firm

 

[Cowboy71]

IF YOU STOP BACKGROUND CHECKS, THERE WILL BE NO REASON FOR THE CRIMINALS TO OBTAIN THE FIREARMS ILLEGALLY.....

I dont get why this isnt clear....

If you stop background checks, you will be shoulder checking thugs in your local gunshop...

Plus, taking the reason for them to buy illegally, will eliminate the old standby charge of obtaining an illegal firearm... I know everyone's afraid that the government is gonna pull the plug and everyone is gonna go in one day, and be denied... but the fact is, it would be FAR worse, if any ghetto thug, could go into your favorite gun shop, and walk out with a firearm.. How do you think they'd feel about selling a firearm to a thug? ****... No one wants to sell a gun to a criminal....

Somehow we managed two hundred years or so in this country without background checks and this rampant legal gun buying spree by criminals you envision happening.

 

[rvb]

I didnt say "we have to do something" Its already been done. I bet you gave the gubment your name and got a lifetime carry permit didnt you... If your willing to let "the man" force you to get a piece of paper that allows you to practice the right you should ALREADY have, why are you *****ing about a 5 minute check to see if your a known criminal or person with a mental illness?

I dont get why You guys(you and some others in more than this thread) are coming at me so hard on this.. A background check to purchase a firearm makes more sense than having to fork over money to the government for you to be able to do what the constitution says. But Your not running around with your hair on fire for that...

Im lost...

Yes there is licensing, background checks, registration already in place. It doesn't prevent violent crime. I consider all of those violations of my rights and would like to see them all gone; im not picking and choosing what intrusions are ok. but I begrudgingly comply w. the laws. So yes, I complain about it.

Sometimes a background check is 5 minutes, sometimes it's a day. It will certainly add costs to a private transfer.

Im currently very loudly complaining about MORE useless requirements (the proposed "universal" background checks the OP is pushing for).

Closing this "gunshow loophole"
1) is an INTRAstate issue, and shouldn't be regulated by the federal government. That's why current law regulates private sales across state lines only. This makes it a 10th Amendment issue in addition to the 2nd.
2) won't prevent the straw purchases already used to put guns in the wrong hands and circumvent the NICS
3) is not enforceable without registration. I believe this to be the ultimate goal behind the govt's push for "universal" background checks, to be able to trace guns cradle to grave.

People get swept up in this feeling that we have to do SOMETHING to make the world safer and our rights continue to be further and further eroded... After all, it's just a 5 minute check, and we "have nothing to hide," right? (Sounds like the reason prosecutors get you to waive the 5th).

If you think like the OP a check is ok, because you have nothing to hide, then you had better also be ok with complete registration and continued erosion of states rights. I'm not ok with that.

-rvb

 

[84VETTE]

Most of the older gen 30 + were raised with the switch hanging over their head. the younger gen aren't afraid of reprisal. That is the bases of the problems we are facing.

I agree with this. Not all of us under 30 were brought up with out answering for our wrong doings. I'm only 23 but I can tell you I've had to pick a branch (or a half dozen) out of the persimmon or willow tree in the back yard. I've said for a long time that the time out is a waste of effort. I just hope it's not illegal in the next few years when i have kids to put them over my knee when they act up. My father had talent, he could tan my hide while driving down the road as I sat directly behind him.

 

[Rob54]

I disagree, when a background check is made (whether it is completed, approved, delayed or accepted, YOUR Name and all the information on the 4473 form MUST BE KEPT BY THE FFL that made the check until he goes out of business. These files are accessible to the ATF at any time. Then when the FFL goes out of business THESE RECORDS MUST BE SENT TO THE ATF. I don't know what you call "registration" - but to me when my name and the gun I purchased is recorded and sent to the ATF, I think it is--- If it looks like a Duck, walks like a Duck and Quacks like a Duck it probably is a DUCK.

The check does NOT include the make or model or serial # of the gun you purchase. It only asks if it is a long gun or a handgun.

 

[Rogkin]

Haters need to be giving accurate facts so they can understand the anti lobbyists lies and distortions. What we don't need to do is give them more reason for fear by our crazy responses.

 

[drysdaleg]

Great read

 

[rvb]

The check does NOT include the make or model or serial # of the gun you purchase. It only asks if it is a long gun or a handgun.

Have you seen the universal background check bill that will be voted on by congress? i haven't, because it's not ready to be voted on yet. I give the odds 10,000/1 that a 4473 will be required and an FFL will be required to log the transaction in his books. I seriously doubt a new law prohibiting private sales will just allow Joe Blow to call the NICS # (or allow an FFL to call a NICS check w/o collecting any other information). The 4473 is where the buyer affirms they are not doing drugs, a prohibited person, and they are the actual buyer.... and where the serial number is documented. I agree w/ LarryC.

-rvb

 

[danielson]

Who was talking about background checks that dont exist yet?

If that bill passes, I bet everyone youve been fighting here will suddenly be on your side.

 

[rvb]

Who was talking about background checks that dont exist yet?

If that bill passes, I bet everyone youve been fighting here will suddenly be on your side.

The time to be pissed about it IS now, NOT after it passes.... We should be trying to stop it, and convince people that more regulations is NOT the answer. I think it is exactly what everyone here was ultimately talking about...

-rvb

 

[danielson]

I wasnt.. I like to live in the here and now, and not freak out about something until its actually a fact.(dont try to turn that into me not being aware of the possible danger, and giving it my attention)

You have been going tit for tat with me, on this subject, and I have been saying from day one, that the existing checks are not an issue, and that removing them will give criminals the chance to LEGALLY obtain firearms. You have argued this point, and I still do not understand why....

It is uncontroversial, that if there is NO vetting of firearms purchasers, it will be easier for a criminal to obtain a firearm. Forget your "straw man" forget your black market, they will be standing at line in your favorite local shop.

THAT, and ONLY that, has been my point FROM THE GETGO....

"universal checks" could be something else entirely.

 

[rvb]

...I have been saying from day one, that the existing checks are not an issue, and that removing them will give criminals the chance to LEGALLY obtain firearms. You have argued this point, and I still do not understand why....

No, I have argued that it won't have an impact on whether they get guns, legally or not. I've argued our current system has no impact on public safety.

You're talking about the legal status of the firearm. I'm talking about whether or not criminals get guns, regarless of legality.... because legal status doesn't matter when I'm looking down the barrel.

It is uncontroversial, that if there is NO vetting of firearms purchasers, it will be easier for a criminal to obtain a firearm. Forget your "straw man" forget your black market, they will be standing at line in your favorite local shop.

THAT, and ONLY that, has been my point FROM THE GETGO....

"universal checks" could be something else entirely.

Easier? slightly. Make a difference in violent crime? doubtful. So it is controversial. Heck, I'd rather bad guys just buy a gun in a store than break into MY home hoping to find one, likely when my stay-at-home wife and kids are there and I'm not.

Why forget staw purchases or black market? Stick our head in the sand and debate only what we see?

Universal background checks is not "something else entirely." It's slightly more of the same useless restrictions.

-rvb

 

[danielson]

Laws, rules and regulations will not stop criminals from finding a way, everyone here knows that. But they are a good faith effort to do what you can. ALL laws are this way. Murder being illegal doesnt stop it, car theft being illegal doesnt stop it, drugs being illegal doesnt stop people from finding a way to get them, drinking age laws, teenage curfew, anti graffiti laws. I could go on and on. NONE of those laws will stop someone from finding a way to do it. But laws and rules and regulations are the best we have in the real world.

Do you understand how preposterous it is, to claim that background checks shouldnt exist because they dont stop criminals from buying guns?

IT STOPS THEM FROM BUYING THEM LEGALLY!!! Thats what a law is FOR...
So that when you murder someone, you broke a law to do so, and are now punishable.

This is not a debate.... Its one party, trying to explain something to the other, who refuses to listen.

Im done here. this is getting silly. Im sorry i dragged it on as long as I did.

 

[rvb]

Laws, rules and regulations will not stop criminals from finding a way, everyone here knows that. But they are a good faith effort to do what you can. ALL laws are this way. Murder being illegal doesnt stop it, car theft being illegal doesnt stop it, drugs being illegal doesnt stop people from finding a way to get them, drinking age laws, teenage curfew, anti graffiti laws. I could go on and on. NONE of those laws will stop someone from finding a way to do it. But laws and rules and regulations are the best we have in the real world.

Do you understand how preposterous it is, to claim that background checks shouldnt exist because they dont stop criminals from buying guns?

IT STOPS THEM FROM BUYING THEM LEGALLY!!! Thats what a law is FOR...
So that when you murder someone, you broke a law to do so, and are now punishable.

This is not a debate.... Its one party, trying to explain something to the other, who refuses to listen.

Im done here. this is getting silly. Im sorry i dragged it on as long as I did.

Well I could say the same thing about you refusing to listen.... See, I totally understand your point; dont think i dont. But I also take that "shall not be infringed" thing to heart and I believe background checks, registrations, licensed dealers, etc to be an infringement. So if it does not deter crime, AND it interferes w my rights as guaranteed by the constitution, then it should not be law. A law against murder does not interfere w my constitutionally guaranteed rights. THATs the difference I can't seem to convey to you.

-rvb