Gun Background Checks Supported By More Than 90 Percent

[photoman]

It's not about what "makes sense" to me or you. It's not about what seems "reasonable" or "effective."

IT'S ABOUT THE CONSTITUTION.

Last time I looked, the Second Amendment didn't say anything about background checks.

 

[Titan]

As a devil's advocate I have to ask, where was the NRA when our second amendment rights were being decimated in states like NY, NJ, CT, MA, etc.

I'm not defending or advocating background checks even though I have to live with them. I just find it ironic that there is all this outcry now. We've been suffering for decades.

Democrats gradually won more and more elections based on the makeup of the working community and voter demographics (schools & colleges, unions, public workers, legal community, labs funded by government, etc. etc.)

Kennedy influence fed the beast.

Eventually Dems drove out enough Republicans so that they could control gerrymandering (the reverse is done in Texas).

Once they had dominance AND gerrymandering, they were able to pass even more oppressive laws (our legislature was headed by William Bulger, brother of gangster Whitely Bulger).

Like most blue areas (including our current federal government), no legislation moved forward if it wasn't appealing to democrats and ANY legislation passed if it would help induce Republicans to re-locate out of state. Again, the reverse of this can and does happen in RED states.

Eventually, the NRA gave up in the interest of prioritizing the success rate of their investments.

Sorry for the political nature of this, but you asked.

It can happen to anyone - even at a national level.

 

[Titan]

IMHO it's useless to keep reapeting there is 'no gun show loophole'.

Even idiot fudds know this isn't true.

There is no loophole FOR DEALERS in that the law applies to them at gun shows as it does on their premises.

There IS a loophole when it comes to private sales executed at SOME gun shows between private seller and private buyer.

If we want to prevail in these arguments, we can't be denying the obvious. That's for the other side to do.

 

[5Wire]

IMHO it's useless to keep reapeting there is 'no gun show loophole'.

Even idiot fudds know this isn't true.

There is no loophole FOR DEALERS in that the law applies to them at gun shows as it does on their premises.

There IS a loophole when it comes to private sales executed at SOME gun shows between private seller and private buyer.

If we want to prevail in these arguments, we can't be denying the obvious. That's for the other side to do.

True enough, it's not a "gunshow loophole", it's a "private sale" loophole. On the other hand, leaving the term alone keeps gunshows as a very minor source for firearms used by criminals. According to an FBI study, about 0.7% (source). An alarming aspect of the study is that nearly 40% obtained firearms from family or friends, about the same percentage as those illegally obtained.

 

[dchapma1]

For all of you that think there is no database now let me provide some evidence that a database already exists. In Webster New York a mental case killed 2 first responders before killing himself after he set fire to his house. Within a few hours after the crime scene was secure the police had identified the gun, where it was purchased and the girl who purchased it, several years ago! She has been charged for straw purchasing the gun for a convicted felon, ( he killed his grandmother with a hammer).

So HOW did they track the gun's history so fast? A database, that's how!
I firmly believe that when a background check is made through a current FFL, the government is secretly keeping that information.

 

[Goodtime Charlie]

For those of you that favor a Universal Background check for those wanting to exercise a Second Amendment RIGHT, do you support Universal Background checks before you exercise your OTHER RIGHTS?

Background check to post on the internet.

Background check to write a letter to the editor of a newspaper.

Background check to give a speech.

Background check to worship in your church, synagogue or mosque.

Background check to peacefully assemble.

Etc, etc, etc.

If you don't agree to a background check to exercise your other RIGHTS, why would you agree to a limitation on your most important of all rights, the right to defend your life, and to resist government tyranny?

 

[aguablanco]

The government knows EVERYTHING about us already. With a background check the FFL will have a record, so what. All that says is you once bought a gun. They have no way to know that it was lost destroyed sold whatever. The only way they are going to take them is to kick our doors down and when that happens we got bigger problems than background checks.

There are over 300 millions guns in this country. By counting all of the hunters as soldiers they make up the largest "army" in the world. I am sure there are at least billions, maybe trillions, of rounds of ammo in private hands. Compare this to approximately 500,000 police officers. How does the government plan to confiscate weapons other than by going door to door? I do not believe that this will ever happen. The chaos and backlash that would follow would most certainly not be worth the cost. While I am absolutely no proponent of further restrictions on gun ownership, probably the least restrictive would be BG checks with sensible exemptions. CCW holders, for example, are one group to exempt. While figures lie and liars figure it is hard to dispute polls about checks when even Fox's numbers are in line with other polls. It is what it is.
RichH

 

[sporty66]

universal backround checks are only going to affect law abiding gun owners.I'm not going to let any one tell me i have to get a backround check on my kids to give them my guns. I will give these people nothing. Criminals dont do backround checks they get them illegally thats why they are called criminals.

 

[EugeneNine]

If they do pass a useless background check law then i want universal background checks for drivers license.

 

[Shootist1954]

Insane people and felons

I have a serious concern about insane people and convicted felons buying guns or ammo. I have NO problem with having a background check on myself before buying a gun because, 1) I have nothing to hide and 2) I do not want any irresponsible person or convict running loose with a loaded gun. After all, aren't these kinds people the main reason some of us have guns for personal protection in the first place?

Roger

 

[Maddog 521]

I say NO to all of their demands. NO to everything they are trying to do. Tell them to ENFORCE all of the laws that are on the books now. Look at what has happened in the last 4 years. It has to stop now.
I also don't believe the 90% they are peddling. They are trying to convince the uninformed people that the 90% is fact. I don't think so.

 

[magsherman]

Here in Missouri you have to have a background check to obtain a concealed carry license. If this stupid "background check" law goes into effect, can't I just show someone my card and say "there ya go, I've already had one. Sell me the gun". That might keep it from turning into a "registration" thing. I am NOT in favor of universal background checks.

 

[GKC]

Here in Missouri you have to have a background check to obtain a concealed carry license. If this stupid "background check" law goes into effect, can't I just show someone my card and say "there ya go, I've already had one. Sell me the gun". That might keep it from turning into a "registration" thing. I am NOT in favor of universal background checks.

In Texas, if you have a CHL, the dealer doesn't have to call in for clearance to sell you a gun. I was thinking the same thing this morning...just like you have to have a driver's license to drive a car (well, legally anyway) then IF we have to have some sort of universal background check, why not approach it that way: you get a permit, which is good for 5 years (or whatever) and then no additional checks are required to buy from a dealer during its valid period; private parties could still sell to one another as long as both had a valid permit.

 

[Steve in Vermont]

In Texas, if you have a CHL, the dealer doesn't have to call in for clearance to sell you a gun. I was thinking the same thing this morning...just like you have to have a driver's license to drive a car (well, legally anyway) then IF we have to have some sort of universal background check, why not approach it that way: you get a permit, which is good for 5 years (or whatever) and then no additional checks are required to buy from a dealer during its valid period; private parties could still sell to one another as long as both had a valid permit.

Ken, I believe we should discuss this idea further. If background checks look to become inevitable, perhaps something like this would be a good alternative. Thoughts?

 

[spydermanDan]

Well said Jack Wagon. I don't want a government registry which is just a wolf in sheeps clothing. When they decide to confiscate our guns they can use the registry to come knocking at your door. Honest law abiding citizens have much to fear when it comes to our government. Last but not least when Barry said citizens agree with him he should prove it and not just spout off the cuff **** like he does.

 

[Rintimtin]

Criminalize the Criminal. Not the crowbar he used to slip the door, not the slimjim he used to pop the car lock, not the gun he used for a drive by.

 

[Rintimtin]

Why not background checks for car buyer. We don't want drunks driving. Why not background checks before you can have kids. We don't want the mental nuts to be around small children. You folks who want to sacrifice security for liberty deserve neither.

Some people should have a license to have children.

 

[Buffalohunter60]

How about background checks to run for political office? Add an intelligence test to it and then have them express their understanding of the bill of rights and what does "not to be infringed" mean to them...if they pass the test...let em run.

 

[owenwd54]

Have any of you seen a poll on background checks I have not. I would not put much faith in any of these polls. I do not believe any thing they say. Do you believe that he really wants to save lives .If he really did he would go after all the gangs that are responsible for most of the gun crimes have you heard him say that they where going to come down on them like rain and give them harder time and the Death penalty . No he just wants our guns so they can do what ever tickles their fancy..
We are not the problem and our guns or not the problem .They want to disarm us plain and simple.

 

[GKC]

Have any of you seen a poll on background checks I have not. I would not put much faith in any of these polls.

You can make a poll have any result you want, depending on what questions you ask (or how you phrase them) and who you ask. For example, I would imagine a poll asking members here if they approved of a gun ban would have a very different result than if you asked the Hollyweird "elite" the very same question.