Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Gun-Control Battle Spills Over To Super Bowl Ads

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 





I am not sure where you are getting your info.


First hand experience.




posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000


How about a Father selling a cherished firearm to a son or a cousin to an uncle? How about one good friend selling an old shotgun to another friend?


OK...wouldn't that father or Son want family hierloom identified and returned to the family if stolen? And how do we distinguish between "one good friend selling an old shotgun to another friend" and a crystal meth addict trading a .9mm semi-automatic for drugs? The honor system?


Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Make no mistake. What they want to accomplish here will make felons out of those people if they don't involve local Police/Authorities to make the transfer. No legal transfer? No way to explain how it's now in the possession of a different person.


Not reporting the private sale or theft of a gun...in the few states that require it...is only a small fine less than a speeding ticket as I understand it. "make felons out of those people" seems a stretch to me.


Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
In Government as in Organized Crime, enemies don't come with hate in their eyes and blood lust in their hearts. They come as your friends with smiles and handshakes while assuring all is well and things are how they need to be for everyone's best interests..........then put a bullet into you the first time your back is turned.


I think this is the driver of a lot of the debate. I see government as often ineffective, bureaucratic and a whole host of other things, but I don’t see them as Tony Soprano looking for ways to “put a bullet into" me.

Maybe that is at the root of disagreement on regulating guns.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by Grimpachi
 





I am not sure where you are getting your info.


First hand experience.


So are you saying you have been to a lot of gun shows?



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by hawkiye
 


It is unreasonable to ask someone to prove a negative.


A negative would be them saying prove it doesn't stop criminals. These idiots claim background checks stop criminals from getting guns. That's not a negative that is a claim they need to back up. They can prove it or shut up.


In Baltimore....


Baltimore County Police Chief James Johnson said Wednesday that the current background check system has already stopped nearly 2 million "prohibited purchases" between 1994 and 2009.


Read more: www.foxnews.com...



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 





They don't have to deal with background checks because there are none! Why is this concept so hard for you to grasp?


Every gun I have bought from a gun show required the same checks that buying from a gun store did. I am not sure where you are getting your info.

BTW I didnt see any anti gun comercial last night did I miss it?


Then you are purchasing from FFL dealers at thier booth. Are you claiming that a large amount of guns are not sold privately at gun shows??? You are saying that private sales don't occur at gun shows???



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Inside a gun show and with sellers at booths you follow the same regulations as if it is a store.

Buying from private owners is the same as if I was at his house or mine.


Are you telling me you want to regulate private sales?
edit on 4-2-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Inside a gun show and with sellers at booths you follow the same regulations as if it is a store.

Buying from private owners is the same as if I was at his house or mine.


Are you telling me you want to regulate private sales?
edit on 4-2-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)


All gun sales should be regulated.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Rather than cite stats and well...reality where gun owners, FFl dealers, gun enthusiats and everyone else explain private sales at gun shows...maybe simple video will help?

19 out of 30 private sellers at the gun shows...where the undercover buyer even said "I wouldn't pass a background check"...sold to him anyways....and all of them were cash and carry...no background check





edit on 4-2-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Inside a gun show and with sellers at booths you follow the same regulations as if it is a store.



False...see above...unless you mean only FFL Dealers at gun shows...which constitute only a portion of the booths...see above



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cynicaleye

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Inside a gun show and with sellers at booths you follow the same regulations as if it is a store.

Buying from private owners is the same as if I was at his house or mine.


Are you telling me you want to regulate private sales?
edit on 4-2-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)


All gun sales should be regulated.

Then we totally disagree.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Well it's a bright new day--- Not for us 49er fans but---

So this morning when I checked the news feeds

all the buzz is about the GoDaddy spot and nothing on the gun control ad???

Maybe Bloomberg would have gotten a better response if he hired Danica Patrick and Jillian Michaels.
Had those ladies put on tight 'T's' with the words "Gun Control" plastered across their boobies???

Of course most of us football fans wouldn't have cared anyway, we'd just bob our heads and go
"Yeah gun control... Who's ready for another beer...What? that last ad? I think their selling some kind of new rifle scope? Hey check out the new Dodge Truck!"

Soooo maybe the Superbowl was the wrong venue for that kind of ad. maybe he would have done better airing it during one of those "Life Time" movie specials?



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Some of that video is totally bogus and heavily edited. Some guys didn’t want to sell because he said he probably couldn’t pass that is ambiguous language open to interpretation. The edited part that mentions fully auto like they could but it without a check and that is completely false. No one can buy an assault weapon without the proper paperwork. Contrary to what some have been told an assault weapon is either fully auto or burst select capable it is not based of looks. They used to say assault weapon style now they are trying to move the bar anyway that not going to work for the educated.

Anyway different states do have different rules on private owners at booths. You can’t sell but maybe 10 or so as a private owner here at a gun show per year. With pistols they still have fill out transfer paper. Remember rifles do not require background checks.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by hawkiye

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by hawkiye
 


It is unreasonable to ask someone to prove a negative.


A negative would be them saying prove it doesn't stop criminals. These idiots claim background checks stop criminals from getting guns. That's not a negative that is a claim they need to back up. They can prove it or shut up.


In Baltimore....


Baltimore County Police Chief James Johnson said Wednesday that the current background check system has already stopped nearly 2 million "prohibited purchases" between 1994 and 2009.


Read more: www.foxnews.com...


They say BS like this all the time, prove it! They can't and won't because they know feeble minds will buy this BS just because they said it.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by davjan4

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
I really fail to comprehend why anyone has or could even have an issue with this


You need to register your cars I assume? anytime it changes hands some sort of record is kept?
At least thats what happens everywhere I know about.

Being concerned about this just comes across a further proof of the average gun owners innate paranoia in my opinion


Owning a car is not part of the constitution. Or a horse. Or a carriage.

Owning a gun IS.

Not having that infringed IS.

Perhaps this will assist you in comprehending.


So by this logic you support the criminally insane being able to own guns?
The 2nd doesnt make any allowances or put any restrictions.

The constitution is a man made document and should not be followed blindly just because it was necessary at the time.
you are a blind fool my friend



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by MajorMayhem
 


As far as background checks go...its a slippery slope but I don't think that any responsible retailer would knowingly sale a weapon of any kind to a person that has a background of violence...I mean I am extremely pro-gun and 2nd amendment but wouldn't lend any of my firearms to someone I knew to be violent let alone sale it to them.

This is just responsible gun-ownership behavior as well as responsible sales/merchant conduct...

the slippery part about this is that it gives the government a foot in the door in regards to regulating the 2nd amendment...its an inch...and they want a mile. Not only that but there seems to be some violation of privacy here as well.



I guess ultimately though,



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


Bloomberg is quite the Nanny Stater isn't he....how vile and disgusting, while he sits in the lap of luxury of having everything he wants.
Still, I believe that the wicked shall be judged...



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I have purchased three firearms at a gun show before. Two did the full background check from a licensed dealer, one was a private sell and did not require a background check. We did both confirm that we were both Ohioans and over 21 (not that either of us could pass for under 21) at the time of purchase.

That particular firearm was even a military grade weapon...an AR7. Which is a takedown 22LR stored under the ejector seats of jet fighters so the pilot has a weapon suitable for hunting small game should they have to bailout. Its purpose for me is to be a backpack weapon for a BOB. Which is essentially its military purpose as well.

Could I go shoot up a school with it if I were that kind of person? I suppose, but the two 8 round mags really limit the duration of any sort of shooting spree. As for use in any other type of crime other than a short range sniper (being that it is a 22LR after all) would easily be defeated by anyone with a presence of mind to grab the barrel followed by a kick or punch with a the free hand. Which is why rifles are not used in common stick ups...that and hard to conceal.

Can a FFL holder do a private sale? Absolutely, provided the firearm is their privately owned property and was never inventoried as part of their stock for sales. This would also require that it was never transferred to them directly from out of state where they had to use their FFL number for the transfer.



posted on Feb, 5 2013 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 


I'm a big proponent all American Civil rights!

Being a minority and the proud papa of two young daughters I'm one of those in your-face don't tread on me kind of guys.
Personally I don't see a problem with the background check system we have now.

I mean I just bought a new Sig P250 Subcompact Nitron w/signite sights to be my new CCW. took longer to swipe my bank card than it did to do a background check. okay maybe it took a little longer but not by much. I have nothing to hide so it means very little to me. especially if it keeps weapons out of the hands of the bad guys!

But and I've said this on other threads... the problem we have has never been firearms it's a lack of proper mental health care. The school shooter and the guy who shot up the theater in CO were both psycho and from reports I read a lot of warning signs were dismissed or simply ignored.

I'd no more hand the keys to my truck to a nut job any more than I would one of guns.
the answer to this problem is not gun control but something far more harsh as in what do we, as a society do with potentially violent mental health patients who go untreated and are left to their own devices.

Do we go back to the old days where we locked them up?





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join