knapplc Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 What really offends me is slimebag politicians on one side using a tragedy to further an adgenda which includes total bans on all firearms. So I'm forced to support the slimebag politicians who oppose them in order to force a stalemate. I think most reasonable people (and I believe the vast majority of Americans are inherently reasonable) know that ALL guns won't be banned, nor do I think most Americans would support a total ban. I think most Americans would agree that certain types of weapons are not necessary, and would support legislation banning them. The only part we differ on is, where do you draw that line? Somewhere between RPG's and Saturday Night Specials, and the results will vary from person to person. Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 The NRA has backed background checks, and so do I. But what they have recently resisted is "universal" background checks, AKA "closing the gunshow loophole", which has nothing to do with gun shows, but is a ban on private person to person transfer of firearms. That's incorrect. The message of the NRA’s 1999 campaign was “Be Reasonable,” and the organization bought ads in top newspapers, including USA Today, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal, to make its case. “We believe it’s reasonable to provide for instant background checks at gun shows, just like gun stores and pawn shops,” the USA Today ad reads. “We’ve always supported instant background checks,” LaPierre sat at a Friends of NRA event in May 1999... http://www.salon.com...kground_checks/ "Closing the gun show loophole" = background checks for guns purchased at gun shows. Link to comment
knapplc Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Registration of person to person transfers creates in effect a gun registration, in itself a key component of banning guns. I'm much more concerned about the concepts of registration and the concept of "approved purposes" and showing "need" that are usually put into the "common sense" argument. Just like registering cars will inevitably lead to banning cars? Not seeing that. Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Registration of person to person transfers creates in effect a gun registration, in itself a key component of banning guns. I'm much more concerned about the concepts of registration and the concept of "approved purposes" and showing "need" that are usually put into the "common sense" argument. Who is advocating for person to person registration? A background check is not registration . . . no matter how hard the NRA tries to conflate the two . . . and make no mistake they're trying really hard. Not to mention that in most cases the government already has a good idea who owns guns. Many (most?) gun owners have probably applied for a handgun purchase permit, concealed carry permit, hunting permit, etc. Link to comment
sd'sker Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Registration of person to person transfers creates in effect a gun registration, in itself a key component of banning guns. I'm much more concerned about the concepts of registration and the concept of "approved purposes" and showing "need" that are usually put into the "common sense" argument. this hardly makes sense. first, yes, registration of gun transfers does lead to gun registration. but how is that a key component of banning all guns? you have to register your vehicle, is that some nefarious plot by big trolley to ban all personal ownership of vehicles? Link to comment
B1G Red Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Just to start, Biden, Feinstein, Schumer, Bloomberg, and although not an elected politician, a billioniare named Soros. Link to comment
ZRod Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Just to start, Biden, Feinstein, Schumer, Bloomberg, and although not an elected politician, a billioniare named Soros. Um Joe Biden just told people to go buy a shotgun, so I think not... Link to comment
sd'sker Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Just to start, Biden, Feinstein, Schumer, Bloomberg, and although not an elected politician, a billioniare named Soros. Um Joe Biden just told people to go buy a shotgun, so I think not... and gun rights have expanded under the obama/biden tenure. Link to comment
B1G Red Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 The NRA has backed background checks, and so do I. But what they have recently resisted is "universal" background checks, AKA "closing the gunshow loophole", which has nothing to do with gun shows, but is a ban on private person to person transfer of firearms. That's incorrect. The message of the NRA’s 1999 campaign was “Be Reasonable,” and the organization bought ads in top newspapers, including USA Today, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal, to make its case. “We believe it’s reasonable to provide for instant background checks at gun shows, just like gun stores and pawn shops,” the USA Today ad reads. “We’ve always supported instant background checks,” LaPierre sat at a Friends of NRA event in May 1999... http://www.salon.com...kground_checks/ "Closing the gun show loophole" = background checks for guns purchased at gun shows. Gun sales at gun shows have the same background checks you have if you buy the gun in the dealers store. All require the yellow form background check. For the last 10 years or so. The only non-background sales at a gun show or anywhere else are private person to private person. Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Just to start, Biden, Feinstein, Schumer, Bloomberg, and although not an elected politician, a billioniare named Soros. Soros?! Oh god! Link to comment
carlfense Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 The NRA has backed background checks, and so do I. But what they have recently resisted is "universal" background checks, AKA "closing the gunshow loophole", which has nothing to do with gun shows, but is a ban on private person to person transfer of firearms. That's incorrect. The message of the NRA’s 1999 campaign was “Be Reasonable,” and the organization bought ads in top newspapers, including USA Today, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal, to make its case. “We believe it’s reasonable to provide for instant background checks at gun shows, just like gun stores and pawn shops,” the USA Today ad reads. “We’ve always supported instant background checks,” LaPierre sat at a Friends of NRA event in May 1999... http://www.salon.com...kground_checks/ "Closing the gun show loophole" = background checks for guns purchased at gun shows. Gun sales at gun shows have the same background checks you have if you buy the gun in the dealers store. All require the yellow form background check. For the last 10 years or so. The only non-background sales at a gun show or anywhere else are private person to private person. Uh huh. I've been to a few . . . and I trust that you have as well, right? If so, would you explain the difference between a "private seller" with 30 guns on his table and the "dealer" with 30 guns on his table? Link to comment
B1G Red Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Just to start, Biden, Feinstein, Schumer, Bloomberg, and although not an elected politician, a billioniare named Soros. Um Joe Biden just told people to go buy a shotgun, so I think not... and gun rights have expanded under the obama/biden tenure. expanded only through the Supreme Court, resisted by current administration. Not expanded through legislation. Link to comment
The Dude Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Less guns = less gun deaths. Unequivocal truth. No, it's not. 1 Link to comment
B1G Red Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 The NRA has backed background checks, and so do I. But what they have recently resisted is "universal" background checks, AKA "closing the gunshow loophole", which has nothing to do with gun shows, but is a ban on private person to person transfer of firearms. That's incorrect. The message of the NRA’s 1999 campaign was “Be Reasonable,” and the organization bought ads in top newspapers, including USA Today, The Washington Post, and The Wall Street Journal, to make its case. “We believe it’s reasonable to provide for instant background checks at gun shows, just like gun stores and pawn shops,” the USA Today ad reads. “We’ve always supported instant background checks,” LaPierre sat at a Friends of NRA event in May 1999... http://www.salon.com...kground_checks/ "Closing the gun show loophole" = background checks for guns purchased at gun shows. Gun sales at gun shows have the same background checks you have if you buy the gun in the dealers store. All require the yellow form background check. For the last 10 years or so. The only non-background sales at a gun show or anywhere else are private person to private person. Uh huh. I've been to a few . . . and I trust that you have as well, right? If so, would you explain the difference between a "private seller" with 30 guns on his table and the "dealer" with 30 guns on his table? If they want to limit tables to FFL holders, so be it. But if they want to register a transaction between me and my neighbor or friend, then I do not agree. Link to comment
Junior Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Just to start, Biden, Feinstein, Schumer, Bloomberg, and although not an elected politician, a billioniare named Soros. Um Joe Biden just told people to go buy a shotgun, so I think not... and gun rights have expanded under the obama/biden tenure. expanded only through the Supreme Court, resisted by current administration. Not expanded through legislation. Do you have sources for any of your wild speculative charges? If so, I think it would be useful for the rest of us to see where you are getting your misinformation from. Link to comment
Recommended Posts