Why I have NO problem with background checks...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I see nothing in these statements where a BACKGROUND CHECK would have stopped people from purchasing firearms. Clearly, the LA riots situation was due to the WAITING PERIOD, which I've already stated that I'm expressly against.
I was merely trying to make the point that everything that government does to try to make it harder on the criminal has no affect on the criminal, only the law abiding.

Also, if being on the evil "federal.GOV" $hitlist scares you so much, why not simply purchase your weapons from LEGAL person to person sales, where no background check is involved.
Being on a list doesn't scare me ... I'm already on a ton of lists. I have a C&R, I've posted here, I'm an NRA member, I have sent politicians many many letters about various second amendment issues. No sir, even if I never filled out a 4473, I'm already on "the list".

My point is that background checks don't prevent criminals from getting guns, only inconvenience the law abiding and could conceivably be used to prevent law abiding citizens from buying guns.
 
That said, I have NO PROBLEM with background checks for gun purchases!

In for a penny, in for a pound, gun grabber...you are more than welcome to submit yourself to a background check if it makes you [feel better but don't make me do it. I don't want to nor feel any need to.
:scrutiny:

Thank you, sanity prevails.

I have a question for those of you "zero background check" folks:

A violent criminal murders your entire family when you are away on business, gets caught by police, and arrested. Some touchy-feely jury/prosecutor gives this person a suspended 5 year sentence due to a technicality combined with the usual BS "he had a bad childhood" excuse.

So when this person, released after THREE years in prison due to good behavior, hits the streets, having "paid his debt to society," he should be able to LEGALLY obtain a firearm...that day?

Wow, yall have a better opinion of human nature than I do.

Prior to the 1968 GCA, which you must dearly love, there was nothing stopping a released felon from getting his firearms back. Sometimes they picked them up at the property room in the prison. As for your scenario, I would rather 10 criminals go free than one innocent be convicted because of a rights violation.
 
You miss the major point of background checks. Where and how a firearm gets into criminal hands is meaningless. If a firearm is used to kill your family it won't matter in the least where the guy got it from. And since the background doesn't stop illegal sales but can stop ALL legal sales, it's a bad law/idea. Bottom line is a background check can't undo the evil a person who doesn't care about the law can or will do. It can only stop the law abiding.
 
In for a penny, in for a pound, gun grabber...
Not exactly high road there.

I don't see StrikeFire83 as a gun grabber by any means, but I do believe he's deludingly himself if he thinks background checks can't and won't eventually be used against all of us.
 
AntiqueCollector
New Member

When the dealers have to call in a background check, and the govt. has shut down the system, well, no gun sales...see how that works as he described strikefire?

What is this background check thing? I have walked in my local gun store showed my Carry permit and walked out in less them 5 minutes.
 
Derby FALs

I'm no gun grabber, but think whatever you want. Here are my handguns, you can come and take them any time you want to try.

MyGuns.gif

If you'd taken the time to read my original post, you'd understand how I detest "sporting clause" "full auto" and "AWB" tactics.

Zundfolge, thank you for keeping it civil. I'm sorry for my earlier jab. Everyone with an ounce of intelligence has some fear of an institution as bloated and corrupt as our federal/state governments.
 
"I don’t lose any sleep over that fact that VIOLENT felons, child abusers, etc cannot easily obtain legal firearms."

It's easier to buy them on the street than at a gun store. It seems you're the one who has made an assumption.

John
 
Not exactly high road there.

I don't see StrikeFire83 as a gun grabber by any means, but I do believe he's deludingly himself if he thinks background checks can't and won't eventually be used against all of us.

Just how far does he have to go to be considered a gun grabber in your book? How many infringements?10? 20? 30? 20,000?
 
"I'll take background checks (which even the NRA supports, by the way) if I can have CCW, no AWB, etc."


Nice compromise. What did you get out of it? Will Sarah Brady retire and go home now? Who signs off on this 'deal' exactly? No one does.

The background check is an important first step. Read the literature.

The NRA supports A LOT of things. Being a member is a compromise for me, about the biggest RKBA one I make.
 
I'll support background checks on buying firearms when such checks are required for convicted arsonists to buy gas or matches, for convicted pedophiles to buy computers, or for politicians and fools to utter an opinion.

Until then, I'll just consider such checks as prior restraint targetted solely against the rights of individuals to own firearms.
 
Derby FALs

I'm no gun grabber, but think whatever you want. Here are my handguns, you can come and take them any time you want to try.

Ah, but there in lies the difference between me and thee. I have my weapons and I am not afraid of what weapons you have. I am not struck by fear of you nor do I wish to infringe on your rights. :neener:
 
American's didn't need NICS checks to have a functional and safe society in 1905 - why today?


This is the reactionist approach, which justifies gun control based on social conditions. This is flawed, since Rights are not subject to which way the wind is blowing.


When all gun control is viewed for what it really is, what it really does and doesn't do - I've found that it is impossible to support ANY gun control whatsoever.
 
OK, you're alright with a background check. I disagree, but hey, everyone's entitled to their opinion... under the 1st amendment, right? Oh, did you submit to a background check prior to exercising that right?

Hey, if a background check would solve the issue, and get the anti's off our backs, I'd be willing to live with that restriction, even if I could never agree with it. The fact is, it won't solve the problem. Criminals are banned from purchasing firearms now, doesn't stop them from getting hold of them, does it? Since the current laws don't prevent criminals from getting firearms... we need more laws to restrict them, right?

Oh, that's right, you don't want _anything_ but a background check. Ok, we have that now... it doesn't fix things. Why keep the background checks again?

If a criminal wants to get a firearm, they'll get one. Even in the UK, where handguns are completely banned, and have been for over a decade, they still get them... and the UK is on an island for Pete's sake!
 
Yes, Derby FALs, because YOU are the arbiter of who and what should be included in your little RTKABA club. Keep note of the number of my "infringements" and report them to you local comisar ASAP. People with a slightly different view on a segment of the issue are suspect. They must be alienated and excised, like tumors.

Guess what, I'm not a Christian either!!!!!!

Groups of freedom hating gun grabbers:

1) National Rifle Association
2) GOA
3) Smith and Wesson
4) Springfield Armory
5) Glock

Too many to list. Everyone, if you are a loyal member of the RTKABA front, REPORT THEM immediately.

If this is how we treat our own then we deserve to lose.
 
Yes, Derby FALs, because YOU are the arbiter of who and what should be included in your little RTKABA club. Keep note of the number of my "infringements" and report them to you local comisar ASAP. People with a slightly different view on a segment of the issue are suspect. They must be alienated and excised, like tumors.

Guess what, I'm not a Christian either!!!!!!

Groups of freedom hating gun grabbers:

1) National Rifle Association
2) GOA
3) Smith and Wesson
4) Springfield Armory
5) Glock

Too many to list. Everyone, if you are a loyal member of the RTKABA front, REPORT THEM immediately.

If this is how we treat our own then we deserve to lose.

Your idea of self worth is mighty. If you can't take some heat then don't start a flamefest. Keep coming back.
 
45 Frank: some people in states that issue them don't have CCW permits, and some states, you don't need one at all to carry and so don't have one, and then end up going through the NICS check if going through a dealer. If I wanted a new gun from a dealer here and the system was shut down for the check, I'd be out of luck.

Though I do much prefer private sales anyways but that's not the point here...
 
45Frank said:
What is this background check thing? I have walked in my local gun store showed my Carry permit and walked out in less them 5 minutes.
Many states' CCW permits are acceptable in place of NICS background checks. It's one case where the government realizes, "hey, we already know this guy is ok," since you've already been through a stringent background check.
 
I’m with el Tejon. I don’t enjoy being treated like a criminal. No cost is high enough to justify that affront.

~G. Fink
 
I realize that background checks don't stop people from obtaining weapons. I challenge ANYONE to find and quote the part of this thread where I say that I believe this.

I also live in the real world. Where I understand that every time a gun crime happens with a legally obtained gun, a la Columbine, it gives the other side just one more piece of ammo to use against us.

If you think you can fight the anti-gun forces alone, then you're sorely mistaken.

The masses of sheeple voted one way last november and we are in danger of losing TONS of rights. You can sit in your box with your ideals if you want, but the truth is there is a great mass of "moderates" who vote every election who hold the future of our rights in their hands.

I know they need to be convinced to vote for pro-gun politicians to keep my rights, and I see the background check FOR GUNSHOPS as good way to help convince them.

If you hate the backgound check, buy person to person.
 
A criminal will be able to get a firearm regardless of whether a background check is required.

I don't care where criminals buy their firearms or what prices they pay, just so long as their acquisition is from a source that cannot be linked to LEGAL, LAW-ABIDING gun owners and thusly their actions cannot be conflated with simple gun ownership.

So what you want is something that makes you feel good, but doesn't actually accomplish anything? How's that different than an AWB, a waiting period, or a complete outlawing of private ownership?

Would you be willing to submit to a psych eval as a requirement to owning a firearm? How about a license to purchase? A license to shoot? How about a tax on ammunition?

Go ahead and bargain away your own rights to a crowd that will flip the tables next week. You don't speak for me.

:(

Ty
 
Just how far does he have to go to be considered a gun grabber in your book? How many infringements?10? 20? 30? 20,000?
Being willing to put up with background checks doesn't make him a grabber ... now if he advocated the grabbing of guns then I'd be 100% on the same page as you about this.

Just because someone is wrong doesn't make him evil :p


I also live in the real world. Where I understand that every time a gun crime happens with a legally obtained gun, a la Columbine, it gives the other side just one more piece of ammo to use against us.
None of the guns used in Columbine were "legally obtained" by those that did the shooting.

Background checks already existed as well ... didn't do a damn thing to stop them.
 
So what you want is something that makes you feel good, but doesn't actually accomplish anything? How's that different than an AWB, a waiting period, or a complete outlawing of private ownership?

Would you be willing to submit to a psych eval as a requirement to owning a firearm? How about a license to purchase? A license to shoot? How about a tax on ammunition?

No. I wouldn't be willing to submit to those things. I don't like submitting to backgrounds checks either. See the post just before yours to understand my reasoning.
 
Those of you pro-background check people: How much background check is enough?

The background checks in the eastern states such as MA, NJ, and NY are quite a bit more extensive and thorough, with way more lists of disqualifications, than the Federal one. I daresay there are plenty of people who currently post to this board, and own guns, who would be DQ'ed for firearms ownership in these states. You'd be surprised.

While I support measures to prevent people who have violent criminal histories from purchasing weapons at retail, the measures that the current Democratic party employs when they get their way go far, far beyond that. How much is too far for you?
 
Your idea of self worth is mighty. If you can't take some heat then don't start a flamefest. Keep coming back.

I didn't realize that trying to start a discussion on an issue about the RTKABA debate constitutes a Flamefest? If it does, then the inflexibility of this forum has gone so far as to render it useless as anything more than a mutual admiration society.

And yes, my idea of self worth is mighty. I have fought for my life before and I would do it again. I intend to use whatever means necessary to stop the next person who attempts to end it:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=261707&page=3
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top