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, 03:20 PM   #51
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SW OK
Posts: 4,279
Liked 2050 Times on 1109 Posts
Likes Given: 3083

Default

Quote:
It accomplishes what its designed to do, make sure you can legally own a gun before a gun store will hand you one.
Tht is what the 4473 and the call to NICS does.


Quote:
Seriously, they are not going after "Assault Weapons" high capacity magazines, or your guns.
Of course not. The anti-gun and anti-self defense idiots in congress would never do that-wrong.
__________________
alsaqr is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 03:35 PM   #52
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 279
Liked 87 Times on 66 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkguy View Post

i'm not sure i agree with this. if they would pass laws to protect gun rights simultaneously with necessary gun regulations, then this might not be true. for example, when a UBC is passed, pass legislation that makes it illegal (at a federal level) to keep a record of the check. shred any docs, and electronic stores of info could hold serious offenses (these can be easily tracked).

but compromise is so rare these days. what would our constitution have been, if our founding father adopted the attitude "my way or the highway?"

not sure i agree with this either. are there more guns than cars in america? i'm not for registration of firearms, but my point is, a system could be created to UBC on virtually every firearm sale out there. if someone goes around it, they can take their chances with jail time, just like breaking any other law.

if anything, in my mind....this statement SUPPORTS UBC. the easiest way by far to get a gun in america is to go to a store and buy one. next, and certainly not much harder, is through private sales...the place most criminals currently get their guns imo.
There are still thousands of previously legally owned shot guns not accounted for that have not been registered in the UK. A good proportion of these are now sawed offs In criminal hands.

Registration here is a totally different ball game to what it would be like in America considering the extent of ownership per person and territorial space etc.etc.

Our ownership used to be less regulated than yours prior to the great war. Restrictions happened over a period of over 80 years which enabled registration to take place.

Your gun culture is much more engrained in your society and considered a symbol of your freedom. That was not the case here therefore it's was easier to reduce gun numbers over time.

The scale of the task to register guns that you don't know exist is impossible. Any attempt by your federal gov. To try to register or take weapons would probably mean more weapons caches dug into the ground than graves
__________________
lfcshooter is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 04:40 PM   #53
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 TekGreg View Post
Bigcountry02 has covered well the fact that Universal Background Check (UBC) will be a national registration that will just create the address list to follow when they go door-to-door for confiscation. It is exactly mirroring the Germany of the '30's.....

Just one example: Cymbalta is advertised on TV to treat anxiety and depression, but it is also on-book (approved by the FDA) to treat diabetic peripheral neuropathy (nerve pain caused by diabetes), fibromyalgia (intense muscle and bone pain), chronic pain related to muscle and bone. So when Cymbalta is added to the list of drugs used to treat "crazy people" with anxiety and depression, what is to stop those people using it under doctor supervision for pain problems from having their guns removed? Perfectly sane people can have their rights violated simply because they take or at one time took a single drug. And Cymbalta is just an example - there are literally hundreds of drugs that have multiple purposes that cross all sorts of symptoms.

It is a slippery slope to support a poorly-defined act....
You seem to be prescient:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/09/a-form-of-gun-confiscation-has-reportedly-begun-in-new-york-state-heres-the-justification-being-used/
__________________

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

Rocky7 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 05:37 PM   #54
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Jpyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sewell,NJ
Posts: 4,815
Liked 762 Times on 441 Posts
Likes Given: 457

Default

The major ingredient in cough suppressants, Dextromethorophan is also classified as a psychotropic drug as are many commonly prescribed sleep aids.
__________________

"The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals.... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." (Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789)

"A free people ought not only to 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

Jpyle is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 05:40 PM   #55
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Tackleberry1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver,WA
Posts: 5,899
Liked 4677 Times on 2262 Posts
Likes Given: 1430

Default

Excellent Debate Gentlemen!

However, none of the arguments "for" accepting UBC's address my primary question of how to stop the victimization of "Sheniqua and Yolanda"?

As long as this country has 21 year old females capable of passing a BGC... there will be an avenue for criminals and gang members to romance, threaten, or extort them into straw purchasing guns for criminal misuse.

So...Do we ban women who live in gang areas from buying guns without there husbands consent?

Do we lock up straw purchases who did this under fear of gang retaliation against there loved ones?

Once we LAC's accept the added restriction and it proves to be as big of an EPIC FAIL as current restriction... do we then accept "smart gun" technology so only the purchasers finger print is capable of activating the trigger?

My guess is it would still do nothing but create a whole lot of "9 Digit" Sheniqaus and Yolandas running around our inner cities...

Think about it.

Tack

__________________
Tackleberry1 is offline  
texaswoodworker Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 05:54 PM   #56
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Jpyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sewell,NJ
Posts: 4,815
Liked 762 Times on 441 Posts
Likes Given: 457

Default

We could pass laws that outlaw crime. Or maybe pass laws that impose severe penalties on using guns to commit a crime instead of criminalizing ownership of guns.

__________________

"The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals.... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." (Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789)

"A free people ought not only to 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

Jpyle is offline  
3
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 06:00 PM   #57
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Tackleberry1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver,WA
Posts: 5,899
Liked 4677 Times on 2262 Posts
Likes Given: 1430

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jpyle View Post
We could pass laws that outlaw crime. Or maybe pass laws that impose severe penalties on using guns to commit a crime instead of criminalizing ownership of guns.
Hmm... perhaps... but I have a better idea.

The Federal and all 50 State Government declare a Law Enforcement Holiday for a period of 1 week.

Every Cop in the county, State and Federal, takes a 1 week paid Vacation and we announce that ALL crimes committed during the LEH are pro-actively PARDONED.

Provide 60 days of lead time to the public so that everyone who want's a gun can get a gun.

We can then just sit back and watch as honest Americans rise up and wipe out the criminal elements within our midst.

CAN I GET A SECOND?

Tack
__________________
Tackleberry1 is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 06:15 PM   #58
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 279
Liked 87 Times on 66 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry1 View Post
Excellent Debate Gentlemen!

However, none of the arguments "for" accepting UBC's address my primary question of how to stop the victimization of "Sheniqua and Yolanda"?

As long as this country has 21 year old females capable of passing a BGC... there will be an avenue for criminals and gang members to romance, threaten, or extort them into straw purchasing guns for criminal misuse.

So...Do we ban women who live in gang areas from buying guns without there husbands consent?

Do we lock up straw purchases who did this under fear of gang retaliation against there loved ones?

Once we LAC's accept the added restriction and it proves to be as big of an EPIC FAIL as current restriction... do we then accept "smart gun" technology so only the purchasers finger print is capable of activating the trigger?

My guess is it would still do nothing but create a whole lot of "9 Digit" Sheniqaus and Yolandas running around our inner cities...

Think about it.

Tack
That problem will never be solved and unfortunately I am not sure that the government are concerned with the sheniqaus of this world.

The mass shootings tend to affect the middle class voters in the main I would suggest . The perceived intellectual voters need to be satisfied that the government have done enough. If the gov. can demonstrate this through ubc then voters will be happy.
Illegal Firearms used in gangland violence in urban areas tends not to effect middle class types in mass shootings and they are not particularly interested in the poor killing each other.
__________________
lfcshooter is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 06:25 PM   #59
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Tackleberry1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver,WA
Posts: 5,899
Liked 4677 Times on 2262 Posts
Likes Given: 1430

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lfcshooter View Post
That problem will never be solved and unfortunately I am not sure that the government are concerned with the sheniqaus of this world.

The mass shootings tend to affect the middle class voters in the main I would suggest . The perceived intellectual voters need to be satisfied that the government have done enough. If the gov. can demonstrate this through ubc then voters will be happy.
Illegal Firearms used in gangland violence in urban areas tends not to effect middle class types in mass shootings and they are not particularly interested in the poor killing each other.
Your correct... but there more than happy to throw the figure of 11,000 annual gun death around while never mentioning the 99% of them are... the poor killing the poor.

This reality represents an EPIC fail on our part... on the part of the gun lobby... for not doing enough to address it.

Yes, we've won lawsuits with the objective of expanding legal CCW to areas like Chicago and DC... but there not reality yet, we get blamed for the carnage, and "middle America" seem to think that this figure represents victims that "look like" Newtown.

Tack
__________________
Tackleberry1 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2013, 07:08 PM   #60
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
jjfuller1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: a place between here and there.
Posts: 4,418
Liked 1126 Times on 734 Posts
Likes Given: 649

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lfcshooter View Post
The perceived intellectual voters need to be satisfied that the government have done enough.
there is the REAL problem. people relying on the government to fix something. instead of the individual.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rhyno13 View Post
It accomplishes what its designed to do, make sure you can legally own a gun before a gun store will hand you one. Seriously, they are not going after "Assault Weapons" high capacity magazines, or your guns.
i was under the understanding thats what the 2nd amendment was for? so confused.
__________________
I have been a silent witness
to all of America's finest hours.
But my finest hour comes
when I am torn into strips and used as bandages
for my wounded comrades on the battlefield,
When I fly at half-mast to honor my soldiers,
Or when I lie in the trembling arms
of a grieving mother
at the graveside of her fallen son.
jjfuller1 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