Changed my mind on universal background checks

[Vector]

I have to disagree, everyone should care about what happens in other states. As what prevails on those places can very well become law in the nation. Remember, complacency kills.

Agreed, as well as a patchwork of different laws that you might be breaking without even knowing it.

For instance I was out in Los Angeles a few years ago with a handgun that I thought was within the law both in and of itself, and the way it was being transported. I based that mainly on the law in my state, and later found out I was in violation of their absurd restrictive city/state law. So here I am, a law abiding citizen trying to do the right thing, yet had I been in an accident or pulled over, I'd probably have been a criminal. Whats worse is that my 2nd Amendment rights would probably be gone for life over it, which is also absurd.
Another time I was going to NJ and almost flew in with my checked firearm. However it was a short trip and I reluctantly decided time was of paramount importance, so I did not want to check a bag. Needless to say I went unarmed.
Now had I gone with a firearm, then went to check it in NJ for the flight home, I might have been arrested on the spot like others have. It would have been due to my assumption that you can legally check a firearm in an airport, but apparently that is not the case in NJ.

So varying patchwork restrictions/laws (which are probably unconstitutional anyway) in different states serve to disarm the law abiding public, and potentially make them into unknowing criminals to boot.

`

 

[slowmopojoe]

private seller background checks

In my state that hypothetical gun show buyer producing a voter ID card or a CHL is prima facie proof he isn't a felon. State government checked that for us. Of course, it doesn't prove he's sane, not a wife beater nor the neighborhood drug dealer. If we let the pro-fascism types require us to set ironclad tests for everything on the Brady questionnaire it will prevent private transactions. Which is what they intend. Secondly, let's not so meekly accept the guilt by association burden. If your private buyer goes on to commit murder with that firearm you didn't pull the trigger, he did. Is the private seller of a Chevy liable if Joe Blow drives it drunk and kills someone? Where does it stop?

 

[riverdog]

The latest I've seen on the Colorado gun bill is at: Popular Standard Shotgun Could Be Banned Under Proposed Bill

Basically, any pump or semi-auto with a tube magazine that can be altered to accept more than eight shotgun shells is defined in the law as having a high capacity magazine. A standard Remington 870 shotgun with a standard tube, can be modified, therefore it has a high capacity magazine under the pending Colorado legislation. Seriously? Seriously... not good.

If you didn't think they're going after everything, think again. Eventually, they will get around to banning VP Biden's favorite double barrel SG.

 

[hang fire]

+1, UBC is the battle cry. Unfortunately, it is often seen as the compromise we can "make" with the anti's. It is instead their game plan.

There is no compromise with the antis, they take and we give, nuff said.

 

[WSM MAGNUM]

I've changed my mind on universal background checks and now think we should push for them

I think you better change your mind again. Universal background checks is one step closer to the anti`s goal of registration.
Registration WILL lead to confiscation.
Confiscation WILL lead to extinction.
History proves it.
Don`t compromise or give an inch on their so called "emotional fixes".
And another way government is disarming America is when laws replace rights!

 

[pillage]

There is no honest give and take discussions on this subject.

My response to a conversation with an antigun co-worker:

Him: "We need to have an honest about some change of the firearm laws."

Me: "No thanks, not interested in new laws enforce the ones we have already got."

Him: "Well as adults we should be able to come to some mutual agreement, on something. How about your side agree to universal background checks."

Me: " So what are you giving up that will benefit us gun owners?"

Him: " Uhmmm.......well,.......That isn't how it works........we need to know what you have, in case you have bad things.

Me: " I know."

Me:" Right now you have squat, you cannot take what you cannot identify."

Me: "It goes in order like this, registration, confiscation, powerlessness against tyranny."

He stands there a while, then blurt out " Well will change the laws to take your guns, as you don't need them."
Me :You just proved my point, there is no give and take with your side,you expect it to be all take."

 

[orionengnr]

Change your mind again.

Whenever someone starts talking about "common-sense legislation", your ears should prick right up. That is code for "if you don't agree with my position, you are being unreasonable".

What this really means is, "I am being utterly unreasonable, and if you don't agree with me, you are being unreasonable".

In that context, I am perfectly willing to be unreasonable.

Now, let us re-set the conversation...starting with:
"What legislation would you recommend that would have actually prevented the Sandy Hook/Aurora/Fort Hood/Columbine/ad infinitum massacres?"
"What are the common denominators?"

In the same way that we do Root Cause Analysis on passenger aircraft crashes, we need to understand cause and effect.

Our society is enamored of quick-fixes. Pass legislation, throw money at it, and hope it goes away. Unfortunately, history shows that quick fixes (especially those implemented without understanding of root cause) do not work.