-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Should Gun Owners Have to Pass a Background Check to Purchase a Gun from a Retailer?
- Thread starter machete
- Start date
-
- Tags
- gun control poll
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Hoosier49er
Shooter
- Feb 12, 2011
- 148
- 18
Are you kidding?
New to the forum and this is my first post. This is a subject that really burns me up. The second amendment doesn't make any stipulations on ownership PERIOD. My sister-in-law is a convicted fellon for no other reason than her ex husband had a better attorney. She was charged and convicted of child abuse. Never laid a finger on her kids, but because her cheating, drug-dealing husband wanted a divorce he called the police and said SHE was beating the kids. Now if he decides to go postal on her, there's not a D**** thing she can do about it because she is a "fellon". She is a "criminal". She can never own a firearm and defend herself from a punk like him. Background checks are a sham, anybody thinking they are stopping the real criminals from getting guns needs to have his head checked. Anybody that thinks the "greater good" and government have anything to do with each other any more will be in for a rude awakening some day I think. I make no apologies for hurting the feelings of any sheep. My vote is NO! Not in any shape or form.
New to the forum and this is my first post. This is a subject that really burns me up. The second amendment doesn't make any stipulations on ownership PERIOD. My sister-in-law is a convicted fellon for no other reason than her ex husband had a better attorney. She was charged and convicted of child abuse. Never laid a finger on her kids, but because her cheating, drug-dealing husband wanted a divorce he called the police and said SHE was beating the kids. Now if he decides to go postal on her, there's not a D**** thing she can do about it because she is a "fellon". She is a "criminal". She can never own a firearm and defend herself from a punk like him. Background checks are a sham, anybody thinking they are stopping the real criminals from getting guns needs to have his head checked. Anybody that thinks the "greater good" and government have anything to do with each other any more will be in for a rude awakening some day I think. I make no apologies for hurting the feelings of any sheep. My vote is NO! Not in any shape or form.
