Senate blocks deal on gun background checks

reply to post by Agit8dChop


You should perhaps read on before continuing your onslaught of insults against a group of people you don't understand arguing an issue in this country you don't have the facts on.

reply to post by Agit8dChop


You need to familiarize yourself with The Real ID Act...here's a thread I did on it, chock full of some eye opening information. Maybe it will temper your attitude on background checks. BTW, is your State one that has implemented The Real ID Act....better hope not....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Des

reply to post by neo96


I understand what you're saying.

But I don't want criminals and crazies owning guns legally.

Period.

Originally posted by Destinyone
reply to post by Agit8dChop

 

You need to familiarize yourself with The Real ID Act...here's a thread I did on it, chock full of some eye opening information. Maybe it will temper your attitude on background checks. BTW, is your State one that has implemented The Real ID Act....better hope not....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Des

Not even American.

Has no grasp of our laws and how weapons are legally purchased. He/She is just slinging insults and hyperbole. Swinging blindly.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by neo96

 

I understand what you're saying.

But I don't want criminals and crazies owning guns legally.

Period.

They already do even with background checks.

reply to post by neo96


Not LEGALLY.

If your 4473 returns a prohibitive criminal history then you are denied a weapon. And most gun shops are pretty judicious when it comes to denying people sales even before the form is even pulled from the drawer.

I like the system the way it is. The only change I would make are people who have been diagnosed with a severe psychosis. Right now that is protected by law and such info can't be shared with NICS. We could potentially mitigate some risk by changing that.

HOWEVER. I am under no illusion that such people will not be able to obtain firearms somehow some way.

I do admit that the need for the background check has by and large been created by government through various legal means that have created a criminal class in this country. Everything from drug gangs to the mob. As such I support the repeal of any and all laws that have given rise to these criminal enterprises and the decay they bring with them to our society.

Then I see no reason for background checks.

I was watching cspan live as they announced the votes for the Toomey-Manchin background check amendment, and left for work right after they said it was defeated. Im also very glad the AWB was smashed down, and also the high cap (actually, they are standard capacity) mag ban.

reply to post by projectvxn


True not legally, but laws don't stop criminals from owning guns they make it tougher for those who have done no wrong to anyone.

I like the system the way it is.

I don't doesn't sit right with me asking governments permission to own a gun that I have to give up my freedom because of what someone else either sitting in jail, or dead has done.

Goes back to that "Those who trade safety for Security" saying

The current pro argument for gun control and background checks is the same argument that was made for the Patriot Act to save people from them "terrorists".

Opinions will vary on that.

Now would be an opportune time to pass a law making guns used in the commission of a crime a death penalty offense.

Instead, we have Obama throwing a hissy.

reply to post by neo96


Well I suppose I am not as libertarian on this detail as you are.

Though I believe class 3 weapons should be handled the same way as semi-autos. I believe we should be able to own destructive devices such as grenades. I believe we should be able to own SBRs and automatic weapons with a simple NICS check just like every other weapon available today.

Class 3 is just a method to continue to enrich the Feds.

reply to post by projectvxn

Well I suppose I am not as libertarian on this detail as you are.

Been called many things on here that was a first.

Though I believe class 3 weapons should be handled the same way as semi-autos. I believe we should be able to own destructive devices such as grenades

Same here a person should be able to own any of those, and the only time a law should come in to play is when any of those things are used that violates the law against murder.

This is my biggest problem with all of this we already have other laws, and now making more laws for things instead of the action.

Class 3 is just a method to continue to enrich the Feds.

Background checks do the same thing.

reply to post by neo96


Well the difference is the NICS check has a direct, fast effect. Whereas the Class 3 process is long, difficult, and extremely expensive.

I would feel better about NICS if it were voluntary(and I bet the industry would use it).

I would also feel better about it if individuals making sales privately could have access to it. I personally would feel better if I could check a guy/gal I'm trying to sell a personal weapon to.

Originally posted by projectvxn
reply to post by neo96

 

Well the difference is the NICS check has a direct, fast effect. Whereas the Class 3 process is long, difficult, and extremely expensive.

I would feel better about NICS if it were voluntary(and I bet the industry would use it).

I would also feel better about it if individuals making sales privately could have access to it. I personally would feel better if I could check a guy/gal I'm trying to sell a personal weapon to.

All a false sense of security because a NiCS check can't predict what someone is going to do.

reply to post by projectvxn


I also support opening up the NICS to private sellers.

I wouldnt use it if I was selling to someone I already know who can legally own a gun, but I would use it on someone who I only know a little, or if I was selling a gun at a gun show.

Im suprised the politicians havent brought this idea up yet in the current gun debate. (Maybe they have, but I havent heard about it yet).

This was the same bill that the senator were not allowed to read before they voted on it.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I commend the senators for voting down the bill that they were not allowed to read and study before voting on it.

reply to post by projectvxn


With respect, why on earth should American citizens need to legitimately possess hand grenades ?

What are you going to do with them ?

Why stop at hand grenades ?

Perhaps you should be allowed RPG's too ? ...Or maybe a personalised Abrams tank,
for those with the cash...Yes, I'm being flippant now, in case you think it's a good idea.

Glad I live in Britain. And you're right, I wouldn't understand, it's an American thing.

reply to post by MrJohnSmith


umm we can own all the things you listed and only the grenade(DD) and RPG(DD) need a tax stamp the rest are relatively unregulated(tanks,armored vehicles,jets/helicopters) think in some cases you might need an import license

cgi.ebay.com... 2 buy your own centurion tank for only 60 grand

cgi.ebay.com... or for the less expensive option armored truck with gun ports for only 2 grand
why cant we have grenades? you guys in Brittan get suppressors for your guns alot easier then we do
more directly to your question why not? they can be fun if safely used and some people (illegally as all hell) use them to fish and i hear they are quite nifty at stump removal but some how think a flame thrower would be better at that ,least for the time being this anti gun legislation is done with and hopefully the price of ammo and guns returns to a more reasonable level

reply to post by RalagaNarHallas


Many thanks for the education...I'm truly amazed ! Yet appalled....

reply to post by MrJohnSmith

With respect, why on earth should American citizens need to legitimately possess hand grenades ?

A question asked that no one really has to respond to simple fact it implies our rights are whatever our neighbors dictate them to be.

What are you going to do with them ?

Another question that no one has to answer for the above stated reason

Why stop at hand grenades ? Perhaps you should be allowed RPG's too ?

Works for me

What a person spends their money on and what they do with it is their own business.

Someone else might have the "right" to say something if said property is used in the ACT that contradicts a previous already made law of harming or injuring, or murderof another.

Meaning if a person uses their own property without doing so none of anyones business.

it's an American thing.

Yeah it is