President's Gun Control Proposals

As to NICS being opened up? I dont see it for the ordinary folks who dont hold an FFL. I could honestly see there be some regulation that certain person to person sales be subject to NICS check, but that would also bring in the issue of requiring a FFL to do the transfer, since they alreay have NICS access.
Click to expand...
That appears to be the idea. The day after the Executive Order on the matter, dealers got a letter from the ATF telling us to encourage private sellers to bring guns in for NICS checks.

Like we need that extra workload. Right now, the system is overburdened and slow. Add every private sale, and it will be crippled.
 
Like we need that extra workload. Right now, the system is overburdened and slow. Add every private sale, and it will be crippled.
Click to expand...

Why can't there be a secure server to long on to and simply get the information with the proper permissions? (obviously not today)

It would seem a bit more efficient and 21st Century.
 
Why can't there be a secure server to long on to and simply get the information with the proper permissions?
Click to expand...
Who gets permission, and who grants it? As others have mentioned, the more data out there, the more the chance of it being compromised.

Look at the front of a 4473. That's a one-page identiy-theft kit if it gets in the wrong hands.

All this for a system rife with erroneous and incomplete data. No thanks.
 
Who gets permission, and who grants it?
Click to expand...

The same people who do it now but no waiting on the phone.
That's a one-page identiy-theft kit if it gets in the wrong hands.

All this for a system rife with erroneous and incomplete data. No thanks.
Click to expand...

Have there been cases of stolen identity traced back to a 4473?
 
The same people who do it now but no waiting on the phone.
Click to expand...
The difference is that on the phone, a human operator has verified that I'm an FFL, and they're monitoring the entire transaction. The operator runs the actual check, not me. Or Joe Blow, whose buddy who used to work at a gun shop who gave him the password.

Have there been cases of stolen identity traced back to a 4473?
Click to expand...
Not that I know of, but the possibility is there. My point is that the system is already intrusive and I know enough about computer security to know how unsecure most data is. I'd want very strict controls on who has access to that stuff.

On an related note, Wayne LaPierre will be speaking to the Senate Judiciary Committee tomorrow. I'll post more as it comes out.
 
I think the memory fades effect is more in the camp of the general public. They become excited about an issue and then the news cycle moves on.

But we will see.
 
I think those who jump on the bandwagon now supporting such a ban or other restrictions such as has been spoke of by POTUS and various congressmen/women will have already jumped to another issue when the midterms and next presidential election comes around. There is a smaller anti firearm base then the pro firearm base, at least from my viewpoint.

Those who have a long standing interest, such as many here, will continue to remember, and will probably vote accordingly. I feel this is what brings some pause to certain politicians when it comes to supporting, say a new AWB. They loose not only certain voters, but also the campaign money, and other funding, either direct or indirect, which can be used to either support another candidate, or to discredit their future campaign.

Thats why its so important to not only be vocal (but respectful :) ) about your views, but to remember when it comes time to donate to campaigns, or other political charities, and cast our votes.
 
I'm taking a dreadful research design class right now. We were discussing the polling and what not behind gun control today. The issue of social media was brought up. And I put forth the premise, that based on Twitter, people are now more concerned about "The Bachelor" than they are gun control, which is a marked contrast to the immediate post-Sandy Hook back lash.

Another thing I've learned thus far is that your average low information voter doesn't participate in off-year elections, nor do they follow anything other than a straight ticket when voting for President.

Sad yet comforting at the same time.
 
I think we can be certain Obama and crew will be trying to keep the memory fresh. At least fresh enough to get something in the media about it once a week or so.

Seems every time there is ANY kind of shooting in the US now it IS in the news cycle.

I wonder why.............

I said it before and I'll say it again. I'd love to ask Obama or more to the point Rahm Emanuel why he doesn't go door to door and take the guns out of the known criminals hands in Chicago. I mean some of the toughest gun laws in the nation but has set a record for murders in January?

Oh yeah. It isn't the fault of the criminal to folks like them.
It is the fault of the gun.

What hypocrisy.
 
Last edited:
Does anybody have an answer to how to keep Teddy from getting a gun while still being able to sell Fred one .

You can't keep Teddy from getting a gun unless you get rid of ALL the guns. It really has been that simple all along. And by the way, if Teddy is really serious he could even take one from a cop.

No law, no matter how draconian, can stop a crime from happening once someone has set their mind to committing a crime.

Did we not learn anything from 10 years in Iraq? People think of Iraq as war, we called it a war. But we spent much time playing policeman and tracking down criminals. Forensics played a huge part and I really doubt Gen. Patton would have ever imagined that one day soldiers would play policeman. Even in a foreign country where our military enjoyed complete technical, numerical, and strategic dominance and had the latitude to do almost anything they wanted in pursuit of the enemy. We were never able to prevent crime from happening. We could stop bombings, killings, kidnappings, thefts, fraud, or any thing else on the list.

We made it more difficult from time to time, caught some before they could pull off their fun. But as long as they continued to pursue their activities they continued to achieve some level of success.

You can not prevent a crime by passing a law.

I find it ludicrous that people listen to this drivel, "if he hadn't had an assault weapon he wouldn't have killed so many". Bull, he could have done worse with a few wine bottles, some gas, diesel, dish-washing fluid, and a Zippo.
 
Alabama Shooter said:
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ng-all-time-hardly-sources-say/#ixzz2JZT8e7V5

I imagine if he challenged a bunch of Marines to a round of skeet that would likely not come out in his favor.

:D
Click to expand...

Hey, I work with a lifetime democrat from Washington DC who had the Boy Scout Shooting Merit Badge as a kid. I'll bet my buddy could out shoot Barry. While I usually out shoot my friend in our local milsurp iron sight matches he does beat me sometimes.

I doubt Barry could load his own gun.
 
Sigh...
“Nothing we’re going to do is going to fundamentally alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down to a thousand a year from what we’re at now,” Biden told reporters after meeting with Senate Democrats in the Capitol. “But there are things that we can do demonstrably can do that have virtually zero impact on your Second Amendment right to own a weapon for both self defense and recreation that can save some lives.”
Click to expand...

I don't even know where to begin with his statements...
 
Presidents gun control proposal

I've never seen a gun wheather it be a rifle, shotgun, pistol, single shot or automatic kill anyone. All gun control should focus on the crime at hand and punish accordingly. Gun control punishes the law abidding citizens of this country and does nothing to control the criminal aspect. We have too many bleeding hearts in this country who feel that when someone commits a crime against another citizen that we can't punish them according to the crime. The legal system (Lawyers, Judges and politicians) are making a fortune defending the guilty and I've never seen where a criminal went and bought a weapon legally. It seems to me that the government just wants to dis-arm the citizens of this country.
 
I've never seen where a criminal went and bought a weapon legally.
Click to expand...

Altough he was not a criminal yet Adam Lanza bought his firearms legally . I'm not sure if your splitting hairs or what the above quote means .

It has been confirmed that Lanza had some real mental issue as well as the guy in Connecticut . What I'd like to know is how long will it take to get a report on what happened in Newtown . I'd bet dollars to donuts that the investigation will show the mother was trying to get help for her son as best she could . I bet it will show there were not enough programs in place or he did not meet a requirement or two to get the right help . The government does not want that story out there right now because that would show guns are not the real problem . The problem is the system so they will not release the report .

Does it surprise you guys that there has not been one leak of info or anything coming out about the Newtown shooting . Either the investigation is being controlled better then any investigation in U.S. history or what is leaking the media does not want to report .
 
If we argue with statements easily shown to be inaccurate, we look like idiots.

Without going through them one at a time, we can find that many of the rampage shooters bought their guns legally.

Cho, Lanza, Loughner, Whitman, etc.

Also, many folks have been claimed to be guilty and aren't. They were prosecuted by mistake or unscrupulous DAs.

We are better with the lawyers than not. If you get picked up for a gun violation - you will be happy to have a lawyer.

So, I suggest rants are not productive on TFL. :mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top