Why I have NO problem with background checks...

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.
Click to expand...


Why do you think the anti's would be willing to accept just a background check. Next week, they'll point to another incident and say that it's inadequate and that what we really need is (insert next hair-brained scheme here).

You are going to lose in the long haul if you bargain away your rights one bit at a time.
 
StrikeFire83 said:
If you hate the backgound check, buy person to person.
Click to expand...

This is already mostly “illegal” in California and may soon be so nationwide as well. Ever hear of the “gun-show loophole”?

~G. Fink
 
So then what do we do, 30 cal?

We are losing rights as we speak due to a congressional majority that's hell-bent on taking away our guns. We have a President who gleefully says that he'll rubber stamp ANY new federal assault weapons ban that comes across his desk!

They were voted INTO POWER by the same kind of middle of the road people that Derby FALs and his like would attack, be-rate, and segregate from our ranks of supporters.

We need them on our side. How do we get them without make a minor concession here and there?

This is not a flame or an attack. I really want to know. Because despite what a few have said, I'm a person who depends and relies on his guns and doesn't want to lose them.
 
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:
Click to expand...

Then why are you so worried about me having a background check? :evil:

They were voted INTO POWER by the same kind of middle of the road people that Derby FALs and his like would attack, be-rate, and segregate from our ranks of supporters.
Click to expand...

Yes, I would segregate and cut them from our ranks like malignant cancer cells. I believe this is survival for real. Sometimes I have to take a stand. I would rather the confiscations start tomorrow than know my children's children will be defensless serfs.
 
Hypothetical:

What if there were some magical system that did an instantaneous background check that the government couldn't "shut off" or inhibit? If such a system were somehow devised (not saying that it could or would be), would everyone still disagree with it?
 
Mr. FALs, I hate to quote myself, but since you're ignoring the argument, I'll ask it again.

We are losing rights as we speak due to a congressional majority that's hell-bent on taking away our guns. We have a President who gleefully says that he'll rubber stamp ANY new federal assault weapons ban that comes across his desk! They were voted INTO POWER by the same kind of middle of the road people that Derby FALs and his like would attack, be-rate, and segregate from our ranks of supporters. We need them on our side. How do we get them without make a minor concession here and there? This is not a flame or an attack. I really want to know. Because despite what a few have said, I'm a person who depends and relies on his guns and doesn't want to lose them.
Click to expand...

I'm still waiting for an answer. Can you protect our rights alone, one man with one vote attacking everyone who strays into his path with a SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT OPINION?

I don't think so.
 
What if there were some magical system that did an instantaneous background check that the government couldn't "shut off" or inhibit? If such a system were somehow devised (not saying that it could or would be), would everyone still disagree with it?
Click to expand...
No.

Every man has the right to protect his family. Even those with violent pasts.
 
So Derek, how do we keep our rights when the large organizations that are doing the MOST to protect them are attacked by the fringe, that same fringe who attacks everybody who doesn't agree with them lock-step?

According so many of the people who've posted on this thread, the NRA is an evil, gun grabbing organization.

I somehow miss that point.
 
I'm still waiting for an answer. Can you protect our rights alone, one man with one vote attacking everyone who strays into his path with a SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT OPINION?

I don't think so.
Click to expand...

All we can do is all we can do. You would limit our ability to do even that.

According so many of the people who've posted on this thread, the NRA is an evil, gun grabbing organization.
Click to expand...

They sometimes appear to be a money grabbing organization preying on the fears of gun owners in the same method Sarah Brady uses with the hoplophobes.
 
NO EFFING BACKGROUND CHECKS!

For starters, I'm not a criminal.

Why would anyone insist I have to prove I'm not before I can exercise a RIGHT, for crying out loud?

What the hell is this fundamental assumption that anyone who wants a gun is probably a bad guy who will likely do a bad thing with it?

What is so effing virtuous about ALLOWING someone to presume you guilty of something you haven't done, won't do, and aren't inclined to do?

Stop it already.

I don't care whose psychological aberrations make them worry about what "might" be done. If they need mental help, that's not my problem.

You don't pass laws to proscribe ownership based on some sissy's phobias.

I am a law-abiding citizen. I am a free man. I am not the droids you're looking for.

What? You let some felon back on the street when you knew he still couldn't be trusted? What are you, NUTS?! And now I have to prove I'm not that guy you should have kept in custody??

Absolutely not!

Look. It's illegal to do felonious violence. Felons commit violent crimes. I will agree that ownership of a felon ought to be a crime.

If I show up and try to buy a felon, then do your background check.

Otherwise, stay the hell out of my hardware store!
 
Okay, well, it looks like we've hit a wall Mr. FALs. I respect your rights to free speech, you ability to buy guns person to person, and your practice of alienating and attacking those with an opinion that diverges only fractionally from your own. Even if I don't agree with them

Nothing more to be said here. Who's doing more to protect the right to keep and bear arms:

1) The man who screams at potential allies in self-righteous indignation.

or

2) The man who makes attempts to gather with his like-minded peers to achieve a political solution which enables all to enjoy the sovereign RIGHT of gun ownership.
 
So Derek, how do we keep our rights when the large organizations that are doing the MOST to protect them are attacked by the fringe, that same fringe who attacks everybody who doesn't agree with them lock-step?
Click to expand...
Ummm, what? it looks like you and I are speaking two different conversations. What does "every man has a right to protect his family" have to do with what the NRA is (not) doing?
 
StrikeFire83 said:
The man who makes attempts to gather with his like-minded peers to achieve a political solution which enables all to enjoy the sovereign RIGHT of gun ownership.
Click to expand...

How are you trying to achieve a political solution which enables all to enjoy the sovereign RIGHT of gun ownership when you're arguing for restrictions on the RKBA?
 
I'm completely against background checks of any kind, most criminals don't obtain their firearms from a gun store or a gun show, very very small percentage account for it.

Overall, it's just more strain on the law abiding citizens. If we trust felons enough to let them out of prison and drive a car, why on earth would we not trust them with a gun? If the Felon is truely too dangerous to be trusted, then keep them locked up or execute them, if it's not a violent felon, maybe we should rethink whats a felony and what's not?
 
Ah ... now I think I see the flaw in your thinking on this StrikeFire83.

You seem to think the antis will be placated with small infringements like background checks ... that if we give them that they will go away and leave us alone.

I hate to tell you, but those that wish to disarm us are just as happy to do it a little bit at a time as they are to do it all in one fell swoop. Background checks (which do nothing to stop bad people from getting guns) are just one of the little bits.


Can you protect our rights alone, one man with one vote attacking everyone who strays into his path with a SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT OPINION?
Click to expand...
If you don't mind me channeling a Southern Baptist Preacher for a moment; If I see one of my brothers wander astray I will try to guide them back onto the path of righteousness.

While I can certainly see why you might feel a bit under attack right now, just keep in mind that all I'm trying to do is point out the error in your thinking and get your head back on right ;)
 
Just ask the little kids and other innocent people on the no fly lists how well the government does background checks. How hard is it to be declared a terrorist these days? Not very. Gauranteed that the gov. monitors sites such as this and that everyone who posts is already on a list of some type.

...shall not be infringed means exactly that, if you are a free person then you should be afforded all of your rights. If you can't be trusted to exercise your rights, you should be incarcerated..

Why do we keep having these same discussions over and over on a pro 2 a web site?:banghead:
 
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.
Click to expand...
This is exactly the mindset that enables the creeping incrementalism that denys free folk their rights and results in no net gain for the RKBA movement.

Strikefire83 - I challenge you to show me where a 'reasonable concession' such as mandatory background checks on the part of the gunnie community resulted in a cessation of national gun-grabbing activities or garnered significant demonstrable goodwill for the RKBA movement.
You seem to think the antis will be placated with small infringements like background checks ... that if we give them that they will go away and leave us alone.

I hate to tell you, but those that wish to disarm us are just as happy to do it a little bit at a time as they are to do it all in one fell swoop. Background checks (which do nothing to stop bad people from getting guns) are just one of the little bits.
Click to expand...
And that's a fact, Jack.
 
Where is your "line", Strikefire?

Texas already will not GRANT A CCW to a citizen on the basis of defaulted student loans. Can you give me any legitimate basis to require a woman to run the risk of rape in a bad neighborhood because she can't lawfully carry?

I NEVER "made a compromise" to allow the Brady Act, or GCA 68 or NFA 34, did you? After they passed did the gun banners just pack up and join the global warming bandwagon? No, they are STILL pushing one restrictive law after another, with their already acknowledged end to remove every last firearm from citizens' hands.

When the Fedgov prohibits purchase of firearms by defaulters, will you accept it? When Ownership becomes a felony for being in debt to Citibank, or for unpaid parking tickets, will you accept it? When you have to submit to approval by a socialist hoplophobic psychologist, will you accept it?

We are under attack, have been for decades. Every step we retreat, the gun banners keep pushing. The gun banners have taken too much ground, we get no "brownie points" with the banners and no talking points with the fense sitters by voluntarily giving ground.

Every point you give up to the banners is a point that THEY don't have to fight over.

Our enemies mean to end citizen ownership of firearms, they will not be satisfied by how we accept "reasonable" restrictions. They will keep pushing. And even when they succeed in disarming you, they will STILL fear and hate you.

What happens then?


--Travis--
 
Defne Backround Checks ?

Please define backround checks.
Are you talking about a simple check
Name, Are you a citizen?
Or more involved,
Name, Address,Occupation, Race, Religion..?
Or are they going to search of your backround,
Name, ID#, Data base, Legal,financial,political ?
Or maybe just the guy down the road that has owned the Gunstore longer than you have lived, he knows your family He knows who you are. He thinks it's allright to sell you a gun.?

What kind of backround check are we talking about? A REAL backround check?

Disclaimer :
I am not a Criminal.
I was once, long ago,
I'M still trying to get past the past.
I am unarmed..
 
As far as I know there is no unbiased scietific evidence that the background checks reduce crime at all. At least they have not shown to do so according to the study Clinton funded while leaving office that was done by the National Academy of Scientists. I wonder how in the name of all that is good we lived before the dang Brady background checks. Much like we do now except the law abidiing have to be checked by the government. I know people have a hard time believing there was a time just over a decade ago when there were NO brady checks. It is a feel good political law that has done nothing but make people feeeellllll good and that does nothing to decrease crime. It has made gun control easier the closing of gun dealers because of paper work and made most citizens think that that dang paper work is working a miracle I tell you a MIRACLE. I do not support background checks. It was a horrible law. It will never be repealed cause it feels good.:cuss: As a natter of fact the Clinton study showed NO GUN CONTROL LAWS IN THE COUNTRY REDUCED CRIME except possible gun court for intercity youth offenders. NONE!!! And common sense would tell you this. This is not a new concept. It has been known from the beginning of time.:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
 
And if you want to read a boring book then go to the Academy web site and buy it. Semms it was about 47.00. Beleive me it is dry and boring.
 
TO STRIKEYOUROLDLADIEFIRE83: A FIRM BELIEVER IN THE 2nd AMENDMENT!(WHAT AN IDOIT)POEPLE LIKE YOU SER ARE THE REASON WILL ALL LOSE THE 2nd AMENDMENT:fire:
 
yenchisks, relax ... hit the capslock button ... we're all on the same road here (that would be The High Road ... check the TOS).


Clearly I disagree with StrikeFire83's position on this too ... but we gain more as a movement if we help educate each other instead of browbeat.

StrikeFire83's position has been roundly debated and discussed and I think most of us here agree that his arguments fall short.

But there's no place for the vitriol.
 
TO STRIKEYOUROLDLADIEFIRE83: A FIRM BELIEVER IN THE 2nd AMENDMENT!(WHAT AN IDOIT)POEPLE LIKE YOU SER ARE THE REASON WILL ALL LOSE THE 2nd AMENDMENT
Click to expand...

-Speaka de Englisch mutch, amigo? I'm the idiot yet you're the one finding that keyboard a little too hard to master? Nice.

I need to state this again, for everybody who came in late...I don't believe that the background checks will in any way reduce crime. I've never thought that.

Watch this, because you don't see it very often. A man changes his mind...

Reading back over this thread, I see that I was, in effect, arguing IN FAVOR of background checks, which was never my intention. I originally meant to say that I didn't find them particularly offensive or prohibitive. I guess I was wrong, as those of you who didn't attack me provided situations I hadn't thought of. Thank you.

I think that this thread proves one thing, how quickly many of you will turn on/witch hunt/attack someone with a slightly different opinion than you.

To everybody who thinks that a lone man sitting in front of a computer is somehow championing our rights, then you're deluding yourself. Discourse is a part of the puzzle, but organizations like the NRA are, as others have said in another thread, advancing our gun rights. We NEED moderate gun owners, those who only have an over-under shotgun, or those who use single shots only, to JOIN the fight and realize that these people are after EVERYONE'S firearms.

Attacking people and branding them traitors to the cause HURTS the 2nd Amendment fight. I'm not saying sacrifice your personal morals to the status quo, but we don't pass laws and elect senators by ourselves.

That's all. I'm a big enough man to admit when I'm wrong. In for a penny, in for a pound.:neener:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
  • Locked
JTO:Improvements Enhance Background-Check System
Replies
12
Views
624
RON in PA
R
S
  • Locked
Carolyn McCarthy is Tireless:Wants Background Checks for Gun Shop Workers
2
Replies
48
Views
2K
#shooter
S
Miguel Santa
  • Locked
Background check and concealed carry permit in Florida.
2
Replies
43
Views
3K
MedWheeler
M
C
  • Locked
Will having a CCW interfere with other background checks?
Replies
24
Views
4K
FTF
F
S
  • Locked
Pardons and NICS background checks
Replies
4
Views
1K
riggs0008
R
Back
Top