Here is an intelligent proposal about guns

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 11:35 PM
link   
This makes sense, if the funds are only purposed to what they say here.www.denverpost.com...
edit on Fri Jan 4 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: Starting a New Thread?...Look Here FirstAboveTopSecret.com takes pride in making every post count. Please do not create minimal posts to start your new thread.If you feel inclined to make the board aware of news, current events, or important information from other sitesplease post one or two paragraphs, a link to the entire story, AND your opinion, twist or take on the news item, as a means to inspire discussion or collaborative research on your subject.




posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by cavtrooper7
 


So you think it makes sense that totally stable, lifetime law-abiding, innocent citizens must pay the state a fee so that the state can prove they have no criminal record?

When did it become the Democratic way to ALWAYS punish the law-abiding citizen?



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
This makes sense, if the funds are only purposed to what they say here.www.denverpost.com...


Imagine how much they'd raise if they taxed hammers?

FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year Than Rifles Read more: nation.foxnews.com...

This whole debate about guns is BS, and I'm not a gun owner. The nanny state is producing weak Americans that one day won't know how to tie their shoes.



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 11:46 PM
link   
A reasonable fee to pay for a background tax does not ....at all...equate to a tax on components.
Money is used to help mental health issues and pay for overused CBI background checks they now charge nothing for.
It's logical and fair.
Whats your bright idea to deal with mental health issues?
edit on 3-1-2013 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 11:57 PM
link   
You'll get nowhere with the gun-nuts here.




I agree with you.



posted on Jan, 3 2013 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by cavtrooper7
 


What is worse a progressive idiot trying to ban all guns? Or a gun lover selling out some rights to keep others?


Truth be told they are one in the same. I always love the why do you need more then 5 rounds to hunt crap.






The founding fathers would be ashamed if they could see us today. Gun lovers like the OP are the reason we slowly lose our rights.
edit on 4-1-2013 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unrealised
You'll get nowhere with the gun-nuts here.


And we will get nowhere in an intelligent discussion with idiots like you....

Why do you agree? What about the proposal do you find appealing? Have you ever been asked to provide critical thought before?

Sugar can be deadly too, maybe we should slap a tax on that too. As pointed out, hammers are a large concern in deaths, maybe we should have our local hardware shops do background checks and slap a tax on those too....

So I ask, why do you agree?!



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
This makes sense, if the funds are only purposed to what they say here.www.denverpost.com...


Wow I never expected such ridiculous nonsense from you... Treating people like registered sex offenders to exercise their right to self protection and then forcing them to pay for their own subjugation has never prevented idiots from doing something stupid...



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
A reasonable fee to pay for a background tax does not ....at all...equate to a tax on components.
Money is used to help mental health issues and pay for overused CBI background checks they now charge nothing for.
It's logical and fair.
Whats your bright idea to deal with mental health issues?
edit on 3-1-2013 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)


Your acting under the false assumption that this type of nonsense would actually prevent someone with mental health issues from getting and using a gun. Please provide some evidence that background checks of any kind have ever prevented anyone from acting out their evil desires?

Of over 2 million deaths a year 1.5 percent account for gun related deaths. We have more important things to worry about since you're hundreds of times more likely to die in a car accident or at the hands of a doctor then a gun related incident. Next time do your research before making ignorant statements. Perspective is everything media is all about skewing perspective...
edit on 4-1-2013 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by ownbestenemy

Originally posted by Unrealised
You'll get nowhere with the gun-nuts here.


And we will get nowhere in an intelligent discussion with idiots like you....

Why do you agree? What about the proposal do you find appealing? Have you ever been asked to provide critical thought before?

Sugar can be deadly too, maybe we should slap a tax on that too. As pointed out, hammers are a large concern in deaths, maybe we should have our local hardware shops do background checks and slap a tax on those too....

So I ask, why do you agree?!



If you can afford a gun, you can afford a background check.

If you don't want to pay it, then you obviously don't see how this little fee can help pay for your 'right' to own weapons.

Paperwork equals man hours.


Man hours equals money.




You want people to spend time and effort on your background check for free?


That's ludicrous.


Just pay the small fee and get your little manhood-extension.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
This makes sense, if the funds are only purposed to what they say here.www.denverpost.com...


Wow I never expected such ridiculous nonsense from you... Treating people like registered sex offenders to exercise their right to self protection and then forcing them to pay for their own subjugation has never prevented idiots from doing something stupid...







People are scared and looking for answers in all the wrong places. Fear is a terrible thing and makes people turn to the dark side.



The OP is trying to settle with people who could care less about settling. They will take that inch and turn it into a mile.



This is kind of old fashioned but still applies today when you make a deal with the devil you reap what you sow. Do you trust TPTB to do the right thing and protect your freedoms?
edit on 4-1-2013 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:13 AM
link   
If I'm reading this right, the proposal is to have people pay for the government to perform criminal background checks on them before they can buy a gun which is something that is currently done but for free. Is that correct? It says further in the article that taxpayers currently pay for the background checks. Is that correct as well?

I'm just making sure I understand exactly what's being proposed before I form an opinion and I don't currently own any guns myself.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Ummm.... (confused look) How can anyone be AGAINST this?? This isn't any registration, new background check or new regulation. Cav? Am I reading this right? Or am I missing something huge that the people against this are seeing??

It looks to me like they're just saying the people buying a gun ought to pony up the cost of Colorado running their NICS/State check. Sounds fine to me. Why should my tax dollars go to fund EVERYONE'S required check to buy a gun from a retail outlet??

Calling it a poll tax like the article says is hyperbole and absurd. A poll tax is charging for something that IS FREE otherwise and using the charge as a deterrent. If I am buying a gun, I'm spending hundreds and perhaps a couple thousand dollars anyway. $10.50 for the NICS check isn't asking to much when it's MY check I'm paying for. I'd only say it MUST be the SAME fee as charged to the other people the article describes getting background checks for other reasons. Not a penny more. Fair's fair though......why should you or anyone else pay my $10?



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unrealised
If you can afford a gun, you can afford a background check.

Never doubted the validity of background checks. Those checks are imposed on the sellers who then impose them on the buyer; what is your point?


If you don't want to pay it, then you obviously don't see how this little fee can help pay for your 'right' to own weapons.


Ah! Here we have where you are coming from. You don't see a firearm as an extension of ones natural right to protect themselves. So then, what should the people be allowed to utilize as self-defense? Their bare-hands?

Completely hypothetical here, but what if all "weapons" were banned but in 2045 the top weapon of choice listed by the FBI was "hand to hand combat" do we then just ban people from actually protecting themselves? Curious as to how you stand when it comes to the natural right to defends one own life....


You want people to spend time and effort on your background check for free?
No and it isn't about that and either you know that and are playing ignorant or just ignorant. Fees are already collected to cover those costs.

ETA: If fees are not imposed already I am shocked. You would think it would be part of the process. Hell, getting a "title-loan" will cost you whatever the title-fee transfer is and is passed on to the consumer.....so if it isn't already done in this instance, then the State is just idiotic.


Just pay the small fee and get your little manhood-extension.

Ha! Your wit is astounding! You should take that on the road....
edit on 4-1-2013 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by AlphaX
If I'm reading this right, the proposal is to have people pay for the government to perform criminal background checks on them before they can buy a gun which is something that is currently done but for free. Is that correct? It says further in the article that taxpayers currently pay for the background checks. Is that correct as well?

I'm just making sure I understand exactly what's being proposed before I form an opinion and I don't currently own any guns myself.







Reality is this money would not be paying for the background checks it would be paying for health care.





The OP is trying to help out Obama care on the backs of gun owners. You can not trust progressives OP they will screw you every time.



Also I love how they call it savings.
This is the progressive mindset hard at work spinning the simple minded.
edit on 4-1-2013 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by SubTruth
Reality is this money would not be paying for the background checks it would be paying for health care.


The OP is trying to help out Obama care on the backs of gun owners. You can not trust progressives OP they will screw you every time.
edit on 4-1-2013 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)


I am not sure in this case. After researching this, it is hard to find info regarding this. If it is a case of passing on a small fee for background checks, it isn't that big of a deal. Impose a $5 dollar fee that is passed onto the gun buyer, via the seller and is collected by the state.

While I am never a fan of such fees (fees typically do not fall under the jurisdiction of a state's legislature and can be increased arbitrarily), I can see why they would want to. This one warrants more research after digging around.



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ownbestenemy

Originally posted by SubTruth
Reality is this money would not be paying for the background checks it would be paying for health care.


The OP is trying to help out Obama care on the backs of gun owners. You can not trust progressives OP they will screw you every time.
edit on 4-1-2013 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)


I am not sure in this case. After researching this, it is hard to find info regarding this. If it is a case of passing on a small fee for background checks, it isn't that big of a deal. Impose a $5 dollar fee that is passed onto the gun buyer, via the seller and is collected by the state.

While I am never a fan of such fees (fees typically do not fall under the jurisdiction of a state's legislature and can be increased arbitrarily), I can see why they would want to. This one warrants more research after digging around.






Follow the money buddy.
It says it will go for mental health care..........Obama care at this point. They are trying to get what they can out of this tragedy in the form of more money.





Progressive are a parasite they will take what they can and use anything to get it.


edit on 4-1-2013 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:26 AM
link   
Okay after a quick research I found out that fees are already imposed:

Initial Applications: TOTAL $52.50
CCIC Fingerprint check $17.50
InstaCheck $13.00
FBI Fingerprint check $22.00

So why does the State want more money? Any local Coloradians able to help here?



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by SubTruth

Originally posted by hawkiye

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
This makes sense, if the funds are only purposed to what they say here.www.denverpost.com...


Wow I never expected such ridiculous nonsense from you... Treating people like registered sex offenders to exercise their right to self protection and then forcing them to pay for their own subjugation has never prevented idiots from doing something stupid...


People are scared and looking for answers in all the wrong places. Fear is a terrible thing and makes people turn to the dark side.



The OP is trying to settle with people who could care less about settling. They will take that inch and turn it into a mile.



This is kind of old fashioned but still applies today when you make a deal with the devil you reap what you sow. Do you trust TPTB to do the right thing and protect your freedoms?
edit on 4-1-2013 by SubTruth because: (no reason given)


This is the problem people who should know better like the OP parrot the media and call this reasonable. Oh and tax payers already pay for it so whats the problem others say...Sigh

The problem is its all feel good BS that perpetuates the protection myth by having gun control. I used to be able to order a rifle from the sears catalogue and have it delivered to my house and now that we have all this regulation preventing that crime has gone up but people call all this crap reasonable... What happened to critical thinking? The goddamned media has America by the balls. When will enough Americans wake up?...
edit on 4-1-2013 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2013 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 



Apathy and fear are hard things to fix. People like the OP will wake up but after the fact. They will wonder were it all went wrong.





new topics
top topics
 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join