US gun law reforms

No not really,I think the goverment could check better than I could or would.
Click to expand...

Because they know best, right?

:rolleyes:

All the Billions of dollars spent, and even with all the "Experts" in the DHS protecting us from terrorists, and after 10 years, we still have Jihadi students overstaying their visas, and killing Americans right here in America ......yet the fed.gov is worried that you might lend a gun to your neighbor that you have known all your life .....

They borrow 40 cents of every dollar they spend, and perform what they do so poorly, yet are out looking for more things to get into and screw up?

Seriously?

I'll bet even you can balance your checkbook, right?
 
No because they have a national data base of criminals thats more complete than my home P.C. has access to.

This is really not that difficult to understand if you want to....

When a gun is sold you have to fill out paperwork just like you do now at your local gunshop. If your giving the gun away then the same background check that you fill out at your local gunshop would be done.

No more and no less.

I would expect people who are responsible enough to own guns wouldn't have that much trouble undersanding this concept.

But then thats no fun because you still have the right to have guns and you dont get to talk about how the "gubernment" is doing you so wrong and wants to take away your rights and your guns......how boring :rolleyes:
:D

All my fiends who own guns understand it perfectly...MY FFL dealer understands it perfectly.

No one is asking for anything else in my camp.

I'm not for any past gun laws that failed.....it included too much other crap.

Real simple folks.
 
All the Billions of dollars spent, and even with all the "Experts" in the DHS protecting us from terrorists, and after 10 years, we still have Jihadi students overstaying their visas, and killing Americans right here in America ......yet the fed.gov is worried that you might lend a gun to your neighbor that you have known all your life
Click to expand...

I don't think its that simple. You only hear of the terrorists that get trough and not the ones that are stopped no security can stop them all. As a spokesman for a terrorist organisation here said referring to the government and security services Quote. Hours after narrowly failing to murder Margaret Thatcher in the Brighton bomb, the IRA calmly announced: “Today we were unlucky, but remember we only have to be lucky once – you will have to be lucky always.”

The question is not if checks could be done ( because they could ) But if they should.
 
If I sell, or give, a gun to a family member or a friend as a private transaction I currently do not have to go through FFL for a background check. I see no reason to change that. I would never give or sell a gun to anyone I do not know.

The so call gunshow loophole is a figment of Mayor Bloombergs imagination.
 
Last edited:
I go thru an ffl regardless.. the peace of mind is worth its weight in gold. After having a scare recently with almost selling one to someone with all the appropriate credentials, i decided to use an ffl just because.. thank god I did because this person did not pass the background check, apparantly he had a "little felony" as he called it.. bit neglected to tell me that prior. No more bill of sales for me ever, background checks shouls be mandatory and we as non ffl citizens that sell and trade guns from time to time should have a system in place to check fod our protection from prosecution and other headaches after the potential sale.
 
My brother in law lost his license to drive years ago.....guess what? No one ever told me.....I would have given him my keys ANYTIME until I found that out.

Its not like I go around asking for his license and he and my suister in law NEVER told anyone. Too embarrassed I guess.

Just goes to show you that you dont know everything you think you do about even friends and family....the older you get the more history you have.

I dont know what my cousin did 40 years ago in california.....get the point?

But if he had to fill out a background check for my gun I would....
 
All my fiends who own guns understand it perfectly...MY FFL dealer understands it perfectly.
Click to expand...

I'm sure he does- and would be happy to tack a "transfer fee" onto every transaction between you and whoever.


I won't sell a gun to anyone who can't show he's not a felon.

I just don't think it's any of the feds' business that they know about every gun bought or sold. That's de facto registration, and everyplace registration has happened, confiscation has eventually followed. No. Thank. You.
 
Plumbnut, most of us aren't against background checks and many of us choose to do them.

What we are against is state mandated background checks. The government has no business in our private property. You can say cars are regulated etc. Cars are not constitutionally protected. Firearms are. If you choose to have a background check done, many FFL's will do that and many sellers will opt to do so for piece of mind.
 
I've said this before and I'll say it again.

If the goverment really wants to take your guns.....they will take your guns.

I dont think you have the firepower to even begin to stop them.

The 2nd ammendment protects your right to bare arms.

While you have the right to bare arms the government sure has the right to REGULATE the ownership.

Plain and simple. And remember your creating a permanent record here on the internet if so worried about the governemnt knowing your business you may reconsider posting your business or thoughts.

Every google search,every post....etc.


We the people still means something to me.....i
 
Plumbnut said:
You have to have a permit to build a swimming pool. Homeowners insurance costs more when you have a pool. You must have a fence around the pool.

See where I'm going?

Cars.....you have to have a drivers test to operate a car in public. Your required to have insurance to operate your car on public roads,
Your required to have a license in your pocket and a license plate on the car.
Your required to have your car checked for function in some states.
Click to expand...

I see where you're going and I think that street is a dead end.

Recognizing that all analogies are false analogies, let's look at this anyway.

Cars... are OPERATED on public roads. Do you see anyone conducting target practice in public on your way to work? Live fire in public (public ranges don't count) in urban areas is banned everywhere. Nobody operates guns in public in cities, and handling guns in public is also generally illegal (it's brandishing). Sometimes people take out guns to show each other, or to adjust their holsters, but I suppose if someone sees that and gets upset, in a city with uptight police officers you'd be charged with brandishing.

Pools are not special. You need a permit to build almost any structure, to ensure that basic health and safety regs are followed. Not because the government wants to know who owns pools and who doesn't.

Homeowners insurance (which goes up if you have a pool) is required by lenders (i.e. your bank) when you get a mortgage. Is it required by the government anywhere you know of? As far as I can tell, that's not the norm.

I thought the discussion was about background checks, and your argument has gone way beyond that, and is now in territory that even the gun banners in congress know well enough not to touch.
 
Last edited:
Plumbnut, you say these things without any proof to back things up. The government HAS started taking weapons.

If the government comes to take any of our weapons based on forums posts, they have no business knowing otherwise if we tell them we lost it in an unfortunate boating accident.

If we're required to have a background check every time, they cannot enforce it without registering us. If they register us, they know exactly who owns what when and if we somehow don't have that, it would have to be illegal.
 
I didn't bring those into the subject......I was just simply showing that everything is regulated in some form after another memeber brought those int the thread.

Guns are no different and the goverment as the right to regulate.


I say things and dont have proof to back them up??? Like what?

If you plan on lying to the government Dakota I dont suggest you post it on a public forum.;) Infact I dont suggest you lie to anyone.
 
I'm all for background checks. Only if they do them on criminals though. They figured they can't FIND the actual criminals, so they'll make some new ones that they can keep tabs on.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does the government have the power to regulate pressure cookers? How about lawn darts? Plastic bags? I'm serious. I'd like an answer. Irresponsible people with plastic bags are a menace if they let small kids play with the bags. We need background checks for almost everything, because either objects are dangerous to little kids, or they can be used as a weapon, or both.

You want universal gun background checks? Universal licensing of gun owners (you brought up cars, and driving is licensed)? Okay. I want plastic bag licensing. It's paper bags for you when you buy things, unless you present evidence of 4 hours of safety training regarding the hazards of plastic bags.
 
Does a different view on this forum constitute breaking the rules?

All I'm advocating is simple background checks for all sales and givng away of guns.

Its not popular and I can see MOST everyone doesn't like it.

The next thing is me being attacked because of my view or claims that I'm breaking rules of some sorts.

I was responding to another member about the pool and the car. Read the thread.

Yes the govenment has the right to regulate anything or any product that is being used inconsistant to its intended purpose.

Read the fine print on a can of spray paint. Pour some oil out in your yard and call the EPA and tell them they cant do anything about it. Goodluck.

Yes they can regulate everything and do.
 
Plumbnut,

I just read the 2nd amendment, and had no problem finding "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Could you help me just a bit where it says "the government sure has the right to REGULATE the ownership."

You aren't confusing "the people" with "A well regulated Militia" are you?

The highlighting serves to distinguish "the people" from "a militia".

Just trying to keep things straight.
 
Jnichols2,

According to your logic then every law concerning firearms is unconstitutional.

If you think background checks are infringment then the rest of the laws have to also be unconstitutional.

Am I correct?

You want a free for all...no checks no serial numbers just everyone has the right to have and bare arms. Period.

I dont think so.
 
Plumbnut, don't be ridiculous. This is an open forum, not private messaging. Anyone can respond to any comments you made, even if you directed them at someone else.

You can advocate whatever you'd like. Repeating your argument over and over, and defending it poorly, won't get you very far. I'm the last moderator/staff you should worry about taking punitive action, but as long as you keep up your gun regulation propaganda, I'll keep posting in opposition, at least a little while longer.

You want a free for all...no checks no serial numbers just everyone has the right to have and bare arms. Period.

I dont think so.
Click to expand...

The premise of that argument is that removing all existing small arms gun laws would have a minimal effect on crime rates (or that it might even decrease crime rates), and would increase freedom (less government bureaucracy, less government information collection, fewer opportunities for the government to pull BS like operation Gunwalker). Saying "I don't think so" is not a valid argument in favor of arms controls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top