Senate blocks deal on gun background checks

Originally posted by buster2010

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.

Funny you seem to think it's ok that this was turned down. With no background checks criminals can go to gun shows and buy them with no problem.

Another ignorant statement.


So, criminals only avenue is gun shows?

I have yet to meet a criminal that stopped before a criminal action, only because of a law written for the area.

Yet another epic failure here.

Originally posted by buster2010

Originally posted by benrl
Slanted reporting, nothing in these bills would of prevented the recent shootings, these guns DID NOT BELONG to the shooters.

So how in the hell would that have prevented the shootings, enforcement of existing laws is whats needed not more laws restricting law abiding citizens.

Wrong. In the Colorado shooting all of the weapons legally belonged to the shooter. If a background check was done on him chances are it never would have happened.

If the law allowed for the diagnosis of severe psychosis to be used by the NICS system then it may not have happened. But that isnt the case, and his weapons were purchased using a gun shop and a NICS check was done on him.

Im not saying theres no room for improvement, but the notion that background checks aren't conducted is bogus.

reply to post by buster2010


I don't know if you ever bought a gun before but I have and every time I had to fill out an application and had to wait for the clerk to phone in my info to the authorities (not sure if local PD or Sheriff).
I have never bought one at a gun show but I'm sure the same procedure is required?
Can anyone shed some light on this?

Originally posted by buster2010

Originally posted by Echo007
Rand Paul was right about democrats using Newtown families.
It makes me sick seeing Obama using Newtown families to help promote his agenda, democrats using them like feed the Children use tv commercials to get you to sponsor a Child or send money.

Republicans do the same thing when they want something passed.

The Chinese and the Kuwaiti governments execute people found guilty of rape.
Does that mean that it is right?

The political parties that run our country number exactly TWO. What makes you think they are very often correct about anything?

reply to post by Thunderheart


Gun shows are typically regulated by the state.

Since gun show booths are typically populated by FFL holders they are required by law to phone in to the NICS system for every purchase. Private sellers that are just getting rid of a gun or two sometimes dont run background checks. But the law doesnt require it incertain states and there is no federal laws or atf regulations requiring it. Which in my opinion is good.

If you take a look at where ccriminals typically get guns, it is not normally at gunshows or gunshops.

Originally posted by Thunderheart
reply to post by buster2010

 

I don't know if you ever bought a gun before but I have and every time I had to fill out an application and had to wait for the clerk to phone in my info to the authorities (not sure if local PD or Sheriff).
I have never bought one at a gun show but I'm sure the same procedure is required?
Can anyone shed some light on this?

If you are in America, it was called in to the Federal Government.... We got that courtesy of the 1992 Assault Weapons Ban sundown provision.

What is really cool, IMO, is how you have to know when/where a shipment of completely LEGAL ammunition is coming in for sale in order to get some right now.
If you want totally illegal HEROIN, it is right down the street, no shortages..... no waiting.

reply to post by projectvxn
Thanks for the info.
I would never sell a gun that is registered to me to an individual without using an FFL...too much liability there.

reply to post by Thunderheart


I'm not sure what state you're in, but most states don't require registration of firearms.
Even so, I would personally prefer to have a BGC done on a person before I sold them one of my firearms. However I would like to see the NICS system opened up to individuals who are NOT FFLs.

Its already illegal to kill somebody, regardless of how it is done.

Drink and drive and kill somebody, vehicular homicide. Shoot somebody and there is a whole slew of terms, murder, first degree, hate crime, etc etc

My point is knowing there is a penalty for committing said crimes doesn't stop criminals, they don't care. They also do not buy their guns legally, nor do they do background checks, mental health checks or anything else. Any bill or amendment or whatever they push or pass will only affect law abiding citizens.

I am beyond sick of this administration. I mean, crying and whining and running to social media to complain seems more like something my teenage daughter would do when she is punished, not something the friggen leader of the USA should do. If he wants to salvage anything from his residency, he needs to shut up, quit campaigning and start leading.

Also he needs to quit the miscellaneous smoke clouds and actually do something about a budget other then crying that nobody likes his ideas.

Just to compare, in Canada, in order for me to own a hand gun, like, let's say a Sig Sauer .45, this is what I have to do in order to get a license.

1- Participate and pass a course on gun hadeling, basic hunting course.
2- Apply for a gun permit.
2a- Because I live in the Province of Quebec, another form needs to be filled so that a criminal record name check can be done.
2c-Because I am recently devorced, my EX-wife needs to sign off on the initial form stating that I am not a threat to her or anyone else.
3- Apply for a restricted firearm permit.

With the gun registry law being shot down by the Conservative Government, I do not have to register my firearm with them BUT the Provincial Goverment is trying to keep it's own registry and I might still have to register it. Personaly, I don't have a problem with that BUT....They better not try to take it away from me...Even as a Canadian the saying " From my cold dead hands" still applies!!

Now...Let's say I want to go to a fireing range outside my province, I should or have too call the neighboring police agency to let them know that I am carrying a gun and will be going tov a specific range with it for a given amout of time. If I don't do that and for some reason get pulled over and the cop finds the gun, even if all well packed and secured, I am still liable to a fine.

Anyhoo....That's pretty much that....

Originally posted by Thunderheart
reply to post by buster2010

 

I don't know if you ever bought a gun before but I have and every time I had to fill out an application and had to wait for the clerk to phone in my info to the authorities (not sure if local PD or Sheriff).
I have never bought one at a gun show but I'm sure the same procedure is required?
Can anyone shed some light on this?

The same procedure is required at evena gun show. If you buy a gun from a vendor, you have to use a 4473 form and NCIS check just like you would at a brick and mortar gun store.

There has been a lot of misinformation onthis subject from the politicians. If you buy a gun at a gun show or on the internet, all federal and state laws apply. If you buy from a dealer at a gun show or an internet, you still have to have an NCIS check. If you buy a gun on the internet, it is still illegal to mail the gun to you and you still ahve to go to a dealer to accept transfer.

What they are talking about and being disingenuous about is that there is not a federal law prohibiting a face to face (remember mailing guns is still illegal) transfer to someone in your own state without an NCIS check if you are not in the business of selling guns. For example: if I wanted to trade a deer rifle to you for your lawnmower, we could meet at your house and trade the property with no NCIS check needed on the federal level as long as neither of us sell guns as a business. I say federal level because many states do have restrictions on face to face transfers so the politicians were actually being deceitful when they said that there were NO restrictions.

The issue for those who want to disarm citizens is not criminal abckground checks...it is already illegal for a criminal to posess any sort of firearm and it is laughable to think they suddenly would obey a law that mandated a background check for their already illegal transfers. The issue is that there are a lot of guns out there that are not on paper because in our history , the background check is a very new thing. 4473's for long arms (rifles and shotguns) didn't come along since the mid 1990's. Since they are off paper, they don't know where they are and who has them. A lot of people like not having guns on paper as they can't confiscate something they don't know about. The entire intent of this bill was not to stop criminals (who don't obey the law already) but to get as many guns off paper, onto paper and keep citizens from passing down or trading or selling undocumented guns to each other.

Originally posted by PatriotGames2

Senate blocks deal on gun background checks

m.usatoday.com

WASHINGTON — The Senate rejected a compromise proposal to expand background checks on gun purchases, dealing a blow to the core of legislative efforts to curb massacres such as the one at a Connecticut school in December

(visit the link for the full news article)

Score a victory for FREEDOM !!!

I just love to watch Obama fail.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Thunderheart
reply to post by buster2010

 

I don't know if you ever bought a gun before but I have and every time I had to fill out an application and had to wait for the clerk to phone in my info to the authorities (not sure if local PD or Sheriff).
I have never bought one at a gun show but I'm sure the same procedure is required?
Can anyone shed some light on this?

The same procedure is required at evena gun show. If you buy a gun from a vendor, you have to use a 4473 form and NCIS check just like you would at a brick and mortar gun store.

There has been a lot of misinformation onthis subject from the politicians. If you buy a gun at a gun show or on the internet, all federal and state laws apply. If you buy from a dealer at a gun show or an internet, you still have to have an NCIS check. If you buy a gun on the internet, it is still illegal to mail the gun to you and you still ahve to go to a dealer to accept transfer.

What they are talking about and being disingenuous about is that there is not a federal law prohibiting a face to face (remember mailing guns is still illegal) transfer to someone in your own state without an NCIS check if you are not in the business of selling guns. For example: if I wanted to trade a deer rifle to you for your lawnmower, we could meet at your house and trade the property with no NCIS check needed on the federal level as long as neither of us sell guns as a business. I say federal level because many states do have restrictions on face to face transfers so the politicians were actually being deceitful when they said that there were NO restrictions.

The issue for those who want to disarm citizens is not criminal abckground checks...it is already illegal for a criminal to posess any sort of firearm and it is laughable to think they suddenly would obey a law that mandated a background check for their already illegal transfers. The issue is that there are a lot of guns out there that are not on paper because in our history , the background check is a very new thing. 4473's for long arms (rifles and shotguns) didn't come along since the mid 1990's. Since they are off paper, they don't know where they are and who has them. A lot of people like not having guns on paper as they can't confiscate something they don't know about. The entire intent of this bill was not to stop criminals (who don't obey the law already) but to get as many guns off paper, onto paper and keep citizens from passing down or trading or selling undocumented guns to each other.

This was their end goal.

Always look for the big picture.

reply to post by TauCetixeta

dealing a blow to the core of legislative efforts to curb massacres such as the one at a Connecticut school in December

I love this line.

The logic is, since we didn't pass the BS laws then we must be for massacres.

reply to post by projectvxn


The Secular Progressives do no have our best interests at heart.

They look inward and think only of themselves.

reply to post by projectvxn


Yep. By using their logic the Tyrant 0bama is for killing kittens in a microwave, because after all, he has not come out against it.




I would love to have more anti-gun rights people chime in. I do love destroying stupid arguments and watching this happen as well.

reply to post by macman

Yep. By using their logic the Tyrant 0bama is for killing kittens in a microwave, because after all, he has not come out against it.

That Bastard!

I don't even like cats, but that just makes me mad!

Tyrant cat microwaving evil OBAMA!!!

Originally posted by MrJohnSmith
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.

Do you expect any better from a country that does not even have paid maternity leave?

We might be the wealthiest country financially, but socially we're right there with the likes of somalia, Ethiopia and Iran

reply to post by muse7


The transformation of America has come to an end.

You lose.

reply to post by muse7


Yes, because paid maternity leave is right up there with a Constitutional right.

Okay then, I have heard it all now.