Today's Indystar poll needs our attention!

[netsecurity]

How would they know whether or not I actually did the background check without registration?

Well at a gun show they could monitor private sales. Outside the gun shows I do not think it would be enforceable, but I think background checks should be freely available if they are required.

The real problem is that if they make NICS freely available to all individuals then it would be abused. Fathers would want to call in to check on their daughter's boyfriend, employers would use it for a free background check, etc.

 

[jbombelli]

Well at a gun show they could monitor private sales. Outside the gun shows I do not think it would be enforceable, but I think background checks should be freely available if they are required.

The real problem is that if they make NICS freely available to all individuals then it would be abused. Fathers would want to call in to check on their daughter's boyfriend, employers would use it for a free background check, etc.

First, how would they monitor private sales at a gun show, and what's to stop people from just doing the buying and selling in the parking lot?

Second, if it's not enforceable, then what's the point?

Third, as you state it would certainly be abused, and would probably cause more problems than it solves, so again, why?

Why do this at all, when it won't solve any problems, and will cost taxpayer money or cost us? After all, there are millions of firearms sales every year in this country between private individuals. That would be millions of background checks per year. That won't be free.

 

[6mm Shoot]

I didn't vote. It is a set up question. I did make a statement to that point. So they win a bad poll. Like it is going to change something even if we did win it. You know and I know you can't win if the deck is rigged. The people that set this up want it to go only one way.

I guess this is there factual reporting. Are they really this uninformed?

 

[Slawburger]

Misleading poll question but the intent is to show public support for Universal Background Checks. I voted NO but we are behind 69-24.

 

[Two-Tornadoes]

Voted NO.

I agree it is a poorly asked question.

 

[merotek]

Voted Yes! Can't happen soon enough.

Everyone saying it is rigged, I think your reading to much into it, the fact is, no one should be able to buy a gun without some form of check.

 

[merotek]

Well at a gun show they could monitor private sales. Outside the gun shows I do not think it would be enforceable, but I think background checks should be freely available if they are required.

The real problem is that if they make NICS freely available to all individuals then it would be abused. Fathers would want to call in to check on their daughter's boyfriend, employers would use it for a free background check, etc.

To be able to run a free background check on would be suitors for my daughter... this does not sound like abuse, it sounds like heaven :P

 

[cmstuard]

Just another poorly worded poll/question by someone who does understand the current laws.

 

[jbombelli]

Voted Yes! Can't happen soon enough.

Everyone saying it is rigged, I think your reading to much into it, the fact is, no one should be able to buy a gun without some form of check.

Because the revocable privilege to keep and bear arms is only afforded to those the government deems to be of acceptable character, right?

After all, it's not a right - it's a privilege, isn't it?

 

[merotek]

Because the revocable privilege to keep and bear arms is only afforded to those the government deems to be of acceptable character, right?

After all, it's not a right - it's a privilege, isn't it?

When you made the conscious choice to break a felony law, you gave up your *right.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

When you made the conscious choice to break a felony law, you gave up your *right.

You realize that many felonies do not involve conscious choice, right?

You realize many people are denied on background checks even though they have no disqualifiers?

You realize that such a law is unenforceable?

You realize that Toomey-Manchin applies to gun shows or events and the way to avoid this law is to take a step off the property?

 

[Thegeek]

I can honestly say I'm torn on the issue. Selling a gun to a neighbor/friend/family that you've personally known for years is one thing. Walking around a gun show, you see "for sale" signs on lots of guns. Just look at how many ARs were for sale at the last 1500. With the person you've known for years, you know their background. With Joe Blow at the gun show... he may be the next wacko.

The media is horrible. There is no "gun show loophole". It's just a place where private transactions happen at a high rate. Let's say they do make checks required. Will it stop both people from leaving, driving down the road and making the exhange? No. Therefore it's just a waste of time. Even if it does work, how will you track it? When I come in, are you going to tag me with the serial numbers of the guns I walk in with? What if I hit the door and say "I brought it with me"?

As a responsible gun owner, I won't sell to a stranger. I always question the motives of the buyer. I have sold to friends. The burden lies squarely on our shoulders. If I were at the gun show with a rifle for sale, I most certainly would use a NICS check table to transfer it to a stranger. The responsibility of making sure the buyer is a proper person belongs to me.

So, NICS checks for all private sales? No. Should NICS checks be available for private sales at a gun show? Absolutely! If you're going to sell to family or friends, your personal history is the background check. If you're selling to a stranger, why would you not want to test their metal?

 

[merotek]

You realize that many felonies do not involve conscious choice, right?

Please Explain?

You realize many people are denied on background checks even though they have no disqualifiers?

I get delayed on every purchase, it sucks, I don't like it, but it is needed. If someone is getting "Denied" they need to find out why, there is a process in place for this.

You realize that such a law is unenforceable?

All laws can be side stepped, unenforceable is a big word and I do not believe it is accurate, hard to catch someone sure, but now we are back to law breakers again... The punishment needs to be severe enough to make the chance of getting caught not worth it.

You realize that Toomey-Manchin applies to gun shows or events and the way to avoid this law is to take a step off the property?

Again, all laws have loop holes, does not mean we should just not have any.

 

[jbombelli]

When you made the conscious choice to break a felony law, you gave up your *right.

If it can be taken away, it's not a right. You don't believe in rights. You believe in privileges revocable at the whim of the state.

 

[merotek]

If it can be taken away, it's not a right. You don't believe in rights. You believe in privileges revocable at the whim of the state.

Going to jail most certainly violates my right to be free... Being free is a privilege?

This will soon turn into a philosophical debate on morals... again we are reading to much in to it.

I will end on, I do not believe someone who willingly breaks laws has the right to have a firearm, we need to perform a check before selling one.

 

[jbombelli]

Going to jail most certainly violates my right to be free... Being free is a privilege?

This will soon turn into a philosophical debate on morals... again we are reading to much in to it.

I will end on, I do not believe someone who willingly breaks laws has the right to have a firearm, we need to perform a check before selling one.

Every person who is not currently incarcerated, who is free to walk among us, has the right to protect his own life just as you and I do.

The right to keep and bear arms is NOT a privilege subject to revocation at the whim of the state. It is not something afforded only to those who the state deems of acceptable character. It is a right afforded to all free people.

It's a shame so many see it as a privilege instead. But you don't really believe in freedom, or liberty, do you? You believe only in SOME freedoms and liberties, and then only the ones you prefer, and only for those people you like. Right?

 

[Jerchap2]

Typical poll designed to produce a specific result. Background checks ARE required for all commercial sales. What the Left wants is to turn private sales occurring at a gun show into "commercial" sales by virtue of the gun show advertising. Such dishonesty is disappointing in politics and in the media.

Agreed.

 

[level0]

Apparently one has to be a Facebook member to leave a comment, which I am not so I will not be leaving a comment.

 

[sartwell]

I just voted.

 

[HenryWallace]

Do you think background checks should be required at gun shows?


Yes.67% 1139 votes ▼

No. (Your vote)27% 463 votes ▼

I don't care.5% 96 votes ▼


When 97% of all of the 1.7million denied gun purchases last year were later appealed and recieved their firearms, I wonder how much that cost the taxpayers and those affected... Time, Money, Faith in the US Gov.