Universal Background Checks... What do they accomplish? - Page 2
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > Universal Background Checks... What do they accomplish?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-10-2013, 11:41 PM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Tackleberry1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver,WA
Posts: 5,925
Liked 4715 Times on 2281 Posts
Likes Given: 1440

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincine View Post
It's true UBC won't stop criminals from making straw purchases or getting guns some other way, but I'd be willing to bet that without them, criminals would be buy guns at the LGS just like the rest of us. So, is making it harder for criminals to get guns a waste of time? Or should we make it easier for criminals to get guns.

If guns don't kill people, people kill people; then checking people follows. No? Yes? Or would you rather restrict the guns?
Criminals ARE buying there guns at the LGS... Just like us!

Only difference is that the criminal is threatening to kill Sheniqua's mother if she does not conduct the transaction for them.

This is why Sheniqua never does any time for providing the Glock that capped 1 rival gang member and 3 innocent bystandars... she was under durress.

Making BGC's universal will protect Sheniqua and stop this from happening how?

Making me take my son to an FFL before gifting him a pistol on his 21st birthday will protect Sheniqua how?

If we set aside the "lofty" goals of legislation and look at how it actually works on the street, we begin to see that doing away with BGC's entirely would actually help society. At a minimum, it would keep Sheniqua out of the equation.

Tack
__________________
Tackleberry1 is offline  
texaswoodworker Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2013, 11:59 PM   #12
Table of Warriors prospect
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MisterMcCool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bumfugg, Egypt
Posts: 7,999
Liked 6765 Times on 3697 Posts
Likes Given: 13340

Default

I have never heard gun shop customer say "Aww shucks. I can't pass a background check."

__________________

No offense and none taken (̿▀̿ ̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄

MisterMcCool is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 12:07 AM   #13
+ TRES VERBO DICTUM +
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Vincine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Adirondack Mts.
Posts: 3,318
Liked 1699 Times on 879 Posts
Likes Given: 1329

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rocky7 View Post
. . . Liberty comes with personal responsibility. Those two concepts are joined at the hip. The one is necessary for other. Each of those concepts provides oxygen for the other. They co-exist or neither exists. Subtract from one and you necessarily subtract from the other. All free people, including criminals, must be held responsible for what they do and must answer for it; preferably immediately. . .
This is it all right here.

How are people imbued with responsibility for their liberty? By being indoctrinated with various moral codes. Where do moral codes come from? By the poor outcome for those without them. NYC and Chi both have strict gun restrictions. NYC has the lowest gun violence & crime rate its had in decades. Chicago is having its highest. The difference is, basically, if you have a gun in NYC, you go to jail. In Chicago you don’t.

There is a value in a government that can immure its population from the law of the jungle, but when the population becomes immured from the consequences of its own actions as well, the jig is up.

And so here we are.
__________________
"Sometimes I pretend to be normal, but it's boring and I go back to being me."
"You might as well be yourself, people won’t like you anyway."
Vincine is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 12:10 AM   #14
+ TRES VERBO DICTUM +
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Vincine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Adirondack Mts.
Posts: 3,318
Liked 1699 Times on 879 Posts
Likes Given: 1329

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterMcCool View Post
I have never heard gun shop customer say "Aww shucks. I can't pass a background check."
No, but I'd bet a criminal would.
__________________
"Sometimes I pretend to be normal, but it's boring and I go back to being me."
"You might as well be yourself, people won’t like you anyway."
Vincine is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 12:27 AM   #15
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
orangello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 19,170
Liked 5732 Times on 3358 Posts
Likes Given: 4877

Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincine View Post
...NYC and Chi both have strict gun restrictions. NYC has the lowest gun violence & crime rate its had in decades. Chicago is having its highest. The difference is, basically, if you have a gun in NYC, you go to jail. In Chicago you don’t.
...
Can you explain the part about not going to jail for a gun in Chitcago?
__________________

Dead Bears, the only good kind.

orangello is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 12:44 AM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Rocky7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Red Deer,Alberta
Posts: 1,412
Liked 1396 Times on 730 Posts
Likes Given: 1932

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincine View Post
NYC and Chi both have strict gun restrictions. NYC has the lowest gun violence & crime rate its had in decades. Chicago is having its highest. The difference is, basically, if you have a gun in NYC, you go to jail. In Chicago you don’t.
Do you really think that's the only difference - whether or not gun control is enforced?

ps: I don't. I think it was the broken windows approach in NYC. It wasn't that gun laws were being enforced, it was that laws were being enforced.

I believe my conclusion is supported by what has happened in other areas, other cities and other countries for that matter. The problem is criminals and the problem is the violence they do. When attention is focussed on those and when personal responsibility is consistently imposed (as it was/is under the "broken windows" philosophy), the problem is being addressed. When we focus on things rather than people, it doesn't.
__________________

C.S.S.A.; N.F.A.; N.R.A. Life Member
Make the world a better place; have your liberal spayed or neutered.


Last edited by Rocky7; 04-11-2013 at 12:55 AM.
Rocky7 is offline  
Vincine Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 12:55 AM   #17
Table of Warriors prospect
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MisterMcCool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bumfugg, Egypt
Posts: 7,999
Liked 6765 Times on 3697 Posts
Likes Given: 13340

Default

The second amendment guaranteed every American the right to bear arms. EVERY American. Later it was established that convicts forfeited that right. Later still, anyone found to be guilty or plead guilty or no contest to domestic violence was disenfranchised. Now they want to expand the background check to exclude the "mentally ill." Next will be anyone prescribed medical marijuana. Then anyone who drinks alcohol. Then tobacco users. Then blacks. Then Jews. Then? Until only the military and law enforcement have arms.

The second amendment: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Let's just ask the founding fathers what they meant by that.

"A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." --George Washington

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials." --George Mason

"Congress has no power to disarm the militia." --Tench Coxe

"To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them." --George Mason

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." --Thomas Jefferson

"The said constitution shall never be construed to authorize congress to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
--Samuel Adams

"Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry." --Thomas Jefferson

"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the direction of congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands? --Patrick Henry

image-2795727500.jpg  
__________________

No offense and none taken (̿▀̿ ̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄


Last edited by MisterMcCool; 04-11-2013 at 10:51 AM.
MisterMcCool is offline  
4
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:03 AM   #18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 3,838
Liked 2706 Times on 1587 Posts
Likes Given: 1718

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by texaswoodworker View Post
Criminals will get guns either way. It is NOT hard for them to get one. They can easily get them on the streets, or just steal them from houses.

Making US do that is pointless. Countries all around the world universal background check laws like that, and yet their crime never gets any better.
and kids under 18 smoke. and kids under 21 drink. and some parents don't put infants in seat belts. and people get crack. and people break the speed limit. and people murder.

there should be no laws because people break them?

i support backgound checks. i support any law that attempts to prevent violent criminals from taking the EASIEST way to get a gun. stealing or buying guns illegally is just that...illegal...and can create other charges against scumbags. if it prevents ONE violent criminal or mentally deranged psycho from easily getting a gun, i say "YES!"

i don't see the big deal...backgound checks are automatic and i carry my gun out in 10-15 minutes. hardly a big deal imo.
__________________
hawkguy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:06 AM   #19
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 3,838
Liked 2706 Times on 1587 Posts
Likes Given: 1718

Default

does anyone think private sales NEEDS some control?

PLEASE be real. the VAST majority of gun sales to criminals are through person to person sales.

don't freak out...just think about it and discuss.

__________________
hawkguy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:08 AM   #20
Table of Warriors prospect
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MisterMcCool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bumfugg, Egypt
Posts: 7,999
Liked 6765 Times on 3697 Posts
Likes Given: 13340

Default

And people get cancer from tobacco and diabetes from sugar. Cars wreck. Planes crash. Should we create legislation to ban everything?

__________________

No offense and none taken (̿▀̿ ̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄

MisterMcCool is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
The Case Against Background Checks Rentacop Legal and Activism 0 03-24-2013 12:37 AM
History of Background Checks Sniper03 Legal and Activism 4 03-14-2013 02:51 PM
Background checks kirbinster Legal and Activism 2 02-23-2013 02:10 PM
Universal Background Checks? Tackleberry1 Legal and Activism 6 01-12-2013 12:09 AM
CCW bypasses background checks blucoondawg Legal and Activism 35 05-01-2012 02:08 AM