Universal Background Checks... What do they accomplish? - Page 3
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 04-11-2013, 01:11 AM   #21
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 3,875
Liked 2751 Times on 1612 Posts
Likes Given: 1761

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterMcCool View Post
And people get cancer from tobacco and diabetes from sugar. Cars wreck. Planes crash. Should we create legislation to ban everything?
i see what you're saying, and agree.

but a background check does not ban anything. it takes up a few minutes of your time. you'll won't hear the word ban come form me too much.
__________________
hawkguy is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:15 AM   #22
Table of Warriors Placeholder
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MisterMcCool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bumfugg, Egypt
Posts: 8,063
Liked 6858 Times on 3743 Posts
Likes Given: 13539

Default

There is no background check for other constitutional liberties like freedom of religion, freedom of the press, free speech, freedom to assemble, due process, trial by jury, etc.

__________________

No offense and none taken (̿▀̿ ̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄

MisterMcCool is online now  
Mason609 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:26 AM   #23
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
hawkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: austin,tx
Posts: 3,875
Liked 2751 Times on 1612 Posts
Likes Given: 1761

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MisterMcCool View Post
There is no background check for other constitutional liberties like freedom of religion, freedom of the press, free speech, freedom to assemble, due process, trial by jury, etc.
true, but there are restrictions and regulations for virtually all of them.

but, agree to disagree. you are entitled to your opinion. i can see no harm in waiting a few minutes to get a gun, so that a criminal must pursue an illegal means to get his. i have to do things that bother and inconvenience me far more...like freakin state inspections and registrations on my cars.
__________________
hawkguy is offline  
MisterMcCool Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:32 AM   #24
Table of Warriors Placeholder
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
MisterMcCool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bumfugg, Egypt
Posts: 8,063
Liked 6858 Times on 3743 Posts
Likes Given: 13539

Default

I am fortunate not to have state vehicle inspections.

__________________

No offense and none taken (̿▀̿ ̿Ĺ̯̿̿▀̿ ̿)̄

MisterMcCool is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:32 AM   #25
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The Free State of Winston, AL
Posts: 2,907
Liked 1886 Times on 1108 Posts
Likes Given: 894

Default

Back ground checks will accomplish nothing but just make for more 'red tape' for those who are dumb enough to submit to them. Most will not follow the law if it is passed and the few who do are the ones who know they can pass the check. It is just another step further down the 'slippery slope'!!!
The last time I looked obtaining, owing, carrying, and using a gun was a RIGHT! What other rights require you to pass a BGC to exercise them?????

__________________

An armed society is not always a polite society, but it is a free and safe society!
Self Defense is an absolute and natural right!
Keep your head down and your powder dry!

JimRau is offline  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:35 AM   #26
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 82
Liked 49 Times on 25 Posts
Likes Given: 70

Default

The vast majority of sales already operate under the background checks for FFL......

The person to person transfer checks would be unenforceable......

The only way it could work, is if they passed another law forming a Federal Firearms Registry!

Screw that the horse they rode in on, and the dog that ran behind!!!!!!

__________________
VoxRomantic is offline  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:37 AM   #27
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
TruggieTex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Rural Virginia
Posts: 1,313
Liked 924 Times on 569 Posts
Likes Given: 379

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkguy

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.
Hawk,
I do not know enough about the background check...how accurate is it? I am in banking and know that systems go down and an approval called 'stand in' can keep transactions rolling up to a certain amount. Most of my firearms were purchased new and involved this check, but I have never experienced a system down delay. Smoothest Gov. system ever?

It seems the big objection to the term 'universal' is that it can allow SOME system,SOMEWHERE, driven by SOME database to determine the then-current requirements for firearm ownership for ALL gun ownership changes...(you give your wife a pistol, your mother a shotgun, or buy a deer rifle from a good buddy).

Obviously this is in very direct violation of the 2nd of a list of amendments demanded by the framers of this Nation. Can it be discussed? sure. Can it be debated? Absolutely! Can it be changed? You bet!...but not by those proposing to do so tomorrow. In fact, changes to that list are so restricted, it requires a special convention.

I could make arguments similar to yours right now regarding many of our fundamental rights as I am not currently charged with the same crime twice, have no pending court appearances and therefore stand little chance of self incrimination, am not a big protest guy so my free speech is really never stretched....

Although we currently would see no change or impediment compared to the way you and I purchase firearms, if the criteria for acceptance changed we would be prevented from purchase and denied our 2nd amendment right.
__________________

If It Were Easy, They Would Not Call It Work, And Everyone Would Do It

TruggieTex is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:45 AM   #28
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Tackleberry1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver,WA
Posts: 5,930
Liked 4724 Times on 2285 Posts
Likes Given: 1446

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkguy View Post
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.
No... I do not think private sales need any control.

The only thing accomplished by tightening controls is the creation of more victims.

Gangs already intimidate Females into straw purchasing guns for them. The tighter you crank down the control... The more forced straw purchasers you create.

So we wind up incarcerating "Shaniqua" because the local gang threatened her Familly if she did not agree tp buy there guns?

Hell, even I we banned and collected everything in existence today, the Cartels would simply add a truck load of guns to there next truck load of Drugs, and drive em across the border.

The answer is not in "prevention" because it never works.

The answer lies in actual punishment. Life punishment for criminal missuse of a firearms.

Remove the thugs from society permanently and the need to control anything evaporates overnight.

Tack
__________________
Tackleberry1 is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:45 AM   #29
+ TRES VERBO DICTUM +
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Vincine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Adirondack Mts.
Posts: 3,334
Liked 1735 Times on 897 Posts
Likes Given: 1338

Default

I just wanna say it's SO nice to have a civil discussion on this.

Whether I'm enlightened or not, is another matter.

__________________
"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 offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 01:46 AM   #30
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pasco Cty.FL
Posts: 6,513
Liked 2454 Times on 1397 Posts
Likes Given: 1911

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by orangello View Post
It will placate the anti-gun crowd; that is all it can do.
I always did like your sense of humor, O.

Now THAT's funny.

IIRC, was it not the Hi-Point 995 which was

specifically reverse-engineered to satisfy the

complaints of gun-grabbers?

And guess what the first gun on their new

ban list is?

"Satisfying the gun grabbers" is, IMHO,

a dangerously delusional concept .
__________________
therewolf is offline  
 
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