Background checks

We already have background checks, and permits, for gun purchases out here.
Personally I rather like the system, but it's not gonna stop someone really determined to get a gun.
It's kinda like locking the door on your car, it will keep the less determined from stealing it, but won't slow down someone who's already decided to do it.
I doubt the cop that got killed a few months ago was shot with a legally purchased firearm.

Also it's hardly fool proof, even when applied properly.
A few years back the Xerox shooting was done with legally purchased, and registered firearms.
Guy may have been an abnormality, but it does happen.

I also know a few people I wouldn't want to have guns (thankfully most aren't interested), who have no legal reason they shouldn't be allowed them.

Honestly, I'd love to see some gun regulations that I could support, but its a complicated issue, and certainly not the "common sense" crap that gets spewed about.

Not sure exactly how you think registering any gun makes tge world safer. Regardless whether the government knows who owns what, how does that change people's behavior? Yes registration makes it much easier to find and take away someone's property but it does absolutely nothing to control what that person does with it prior to confiscation.

What crimes do you intend to stop by your plans? Please be very specific because I have yet to hear of any proposed legislation that would have guaranteed to stop criminals (with the exception that people who are incarcerated don't commit crimes against the public while locked up and the death penalty has really low recidivism).

Has somebody's account been hacked?

So for the record what weapons are OK?

I am not against background checks. Hell I wish I had an app to allow me to check face to face sales as I, like most folks, do not want weapons ending up in the wrong hands that being said....

What weapons are OK? Revolvers? Bolt guns? Lever guns? Pump Shot Guns???

I ask because an 8 shot revolver with a speed loader is pretty dangerous?

A 10 shot mag fed bolt gun with a scope is a fairly dangerous long range sniper rifle....no?

A lever gun was damn near an assault rifle well into the mid 1900s.

Pump shotgun is a DEVASTATING close range weapon.

So as a “hand loader” what is ok? Single shot/break action? Black powder?

My point is I am a fairly middle of the road gun guy in terms of regulations as I do believe we have a responsibility to keep arms out of the wrong hands and more importantly keep those “hands” locked up if they are that dangerous. I, however, see folly in limiting arms to the law abiding as today it’s AR15s, tomorrow it’s semi auto shotguns, the next day it’s all semis then it’s all multi shot arms then it’s ........ well it could never be something like turning in sharp knives because that would be crazy talk as that would never happen ........ until it did. Sorry my bad until it does.

Nobody wants children hurt. Nobody wants arms accessible by the criminal or crazy. Willful allowance facilitating that should be punished to the full extent of the law. Disarming the law abiding is like making us all drive golf carts because having the ability to go fast means we are killers in waiting.

I think Handloader has a point. By extension, the best way to stop having innocent victims of vehicular homicide by drunken drivers is to keep sober drivers off the road.

The leading preventable cause of death among under 14 year old Americans is illegally operated motor vehicles. If anyone who has ever used alcohol or drugs was barred from driving, many children's lives would be saved. If we banned high capacity assault vehicles, more lives would be saved. Nobody needs a high powered motor vehicle, so banning vehicles with scary, and unnecessary, military features or more than 4 cylinders could save lots of children. If driving were entirely banned with a mile of any school between 0600 and 1900, just think how many children's lives could be saved. And people who allow their motor vehicles to be stolen and subsequently used in a vehicular homicide? They need to be held accountable for the actions of others who stole from them and then used those evil assault vehicles for evil.

Whoa ... and the OP has been here since '08?

And the laws against homicide have been on the books since when?

So yeah, more laws obviously are gonna save lives ...

Join date
Post count

Sorry your girl lost.

Mr. Large Mouth Bass says, “Hmmm, something not right here - I am not taking that bait!”

But last time I checked the second admendment [sic] was for everyone not just the "SELECT" few.

Click to expand...

I'm thinking your opinion has changed over the years.

I will trade my rights if another child does not have to die because so wack job can buy a ar15.

Click to expand...

Surrender your firearms voluntarily, then. That way, you'll know you did your part to make sure you yourself don't carry out a mass-shooting. Will we, as a society, be better off? Maybe. Maybe not. But, data does not support the idea that countries with bans or heavy restrictions on firearms-ownership by their subjects are inherently safer.

I've said it before, but, if stricter gun-control saves just one life, how many will it cost?

By definition criminals are already doing illegal activities. They will break I and steal guns from honest law abiding citizens.
So the next thing will be law abiding citizens prosecuted for not securing their guns properly against criminals
Criminals will still get their guns and citizens will pay the consequences

1. No replies from the OP is a giveaway, but playing along:
2. What's an "assault weapon"?
3. What REALLY saves lives are bans on: speech, travel and privacy. Remove protections from self-incrimination and police torture. Soviet style internal passports and legally linking place of employment and place of residence would CONSERVATIVELY cut serial murder in half.

Just HOW much do you want to "protect" the children(tm)?

I agree. Next step, ban handloanding, all reloading. The government can’t be sure you are qualified to reload such a dangerous thing.

He said, tongue in cheek to spin up the troll...

This thread is a bit ridiculous.

Sovblocgunfan said:

This thread is a bit ridiculous.

Click to expand...

Any type of compromise will never work because people on both side of the issues do not trust each other.

paulsj said:

Any type of compromise will never work because people on both side of the issues do not trust each other.

Click to expand...

I think that’s obvious.

However, this is not what I was thinking about when I wrote my post.

We just had a raging 7-page thread on this sort of subject. All of a sudden, the OP who happens to have claimed membership to GOA at some point, and until yesterday hasnt posted much of anything in two years, proclaims to everyone in the forum that he wants registration in order to perform background checks “for the children”. That’s why i think it’s ridiculous. Seriously?

Who knows. Maybe the OP is an attempt at sarcasm.

HANDLOADER said:

Back ground checks save lives and gun registration and outright bans on assault weapons save lives. I will trade my rights if another child does not have to die because so wack job can buy a ar15. I think gun owners should have to register their weapons in order to protect our public in the process of registering we would then be certain when doing back ground checks that the weapon would then go to the appropriate party. I think we should put children first. You can fight this and drag it out over the next ten years and still lose or you can work now and make the damage less severe.

Click to expand...

I think your opinion is in the minority on this site. Just a wild guess.

I hate it when people use the tragic deaths of school children and grieving families to support stricter gun control. Sandy Hook is a perfect example. A legally owned weapon was left by a mother where her severely mentally ill could access it. If the AR wasn't available he would have used the shotgun he had in the car. Registration and background checks wouldn't have stopped this horrendous mass murder. I used to drive by Sandy Hook elementary school everyday when I lived there and I feel terrible about it but parading the grieving families around to promote more gun control is shameless IMO.

Maybe OP drunk-posted? After midnight on St. Patty's...
Interesting that the same party that wants to ban guns and everything else "for the children" is the same group fighting to keep murder of unborn children legal.
It's crazy the "logic" some people use. Maybe we should all just register our money and get a background check every time we make a purchase of a gun or anything else that can be used to injure or kill someone? Nothing wrong with that, right?

Our community is polite, even in response to the ill-formed and un-substantiated opinions expressed in the OP.

An armed society really is a polite society, even on-line.

HANDLOADER said:

Back ground checks save lives and gun registration and outright bans on assault weapons save lives. I will trade my rights if another child does not have to die because so wack job can buy a ar15. I think gun owners should have to register their weapons in order to protect our public in the process of registering we would then be certain when doing back ground checks that the weapon would then go to the appropriate party. I think we should put children first. You can fight this and drag it out over the next ten years and still lose or you can work now and make the damage less severe.

Click to expand...

1. You will trade your gun rights so that another child does not have to die. Why, are you planning to shoot one?

2. We would then be certain that the weapon would go to the appropriate party. Have you been involved in a "straw purchase" or failed to report one?

3. We should put children first. Enjoying constitutional rights has nothing to do with putting "children first" unless you are referring to the annual slaughter of millions of unborn.

4. You can drag this out over the next ten years and still lose. So you think losing the 2nd Amendment is inevitable? What's next, freedom of speech?

Nobody is forcing you to buy an AR so please don't if owning one scares you so much - but don't presume to tell the rest of us what we can and cannot do.

HANDLOADER said:

Back ground checks save lives and gun registration and outright bans on assault weapons save lives. I will trade my rights if another child does not have to die because so wack job can buy a ar15. I think gun owners should have to register their weapons in order to protect our public in the process of registering we would then be certain when doing back ground checks that the weapon would then go to the appropriate party. I think we should put children first. You can fight this and drag it out over the next ten years and still lose or you can work now and make the damage less severe.

Click to expand...

Where does it stop after your party takes away all our guns? Knives hammers, baseball bats next.