1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Background checks? Yes; Registration? No.

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by revolversrbetter, Feb 8, 2013.

  1. joeschmoe

    joeschmoe New Member

    You mean other than having such a law thrown out by the courts.
  2. velojym

    velojym New Member

    So long as the bureaucrats and politicians can dictate what constitutes a disqualifying condition, I can't support any government run background check scheme. There are plenty of people who are either non-violent "criminals" who harmed no one, or otherwise honest folks who may have made a mistake at some point in their lives. In neither case would I heavy-handedly come down and and proclaim that their lives aren't worth defending.
    On the other hand, if a voluntary association of gun shop owners kept a list of *violent* offenders... public information right off the blotter page... and refused to sell to them, I'd be ok with that.
    Even a universal background check scheme like the one that we have now, which ONLY disqualified people convicted of actual violent crime, it'd sure beat what we have now.

    As for perceived mental condition... I've known plenty of people otherwise thought of as crazy, just because they didn't follow the herd. Where's the line? I suppose if someone acts oddly *and* threatens violence, I'd pull the rug out.

    There would also have to be a mechanism to hold someone accountable, in case an individual is unduly oppressed, and suffers loss as a result. The accountable person would be the one who stamped "No" on the 4473 request. Good luck finding someone who'd want that job.
  3. Vern Humphrey

    Vern Humphrey Active Member

    Having the law thrown out is not a penalty. Sending those who voted for it to prison would be a penalty.
  4. basicblur

    basicblur Active Member

    BIDS vs. NICS
    As I've heard it discussed, the BIDS system would work (Blind Information Database System), and at much lower cost than NICS.

    The problem is the BIDS database is blind, and those in power just can't stand that.
    They've got to have names attached to the guns, for whatever the future holds.

    BTW - since I'm:
    1. An old (probably angry, if you listen to the media) white male.
    2. Wear a cheap Casio watch (the choice of terrorists).
    3. Am an NRA member (a lifer, no less)!
    4. Have a beard.
    I'm probably on somebody's Terrorist Watch List X number of times over.

    Gotta run...I think I hear a drone over the house...! :what:
  5. joeschmoe

    joeschmoe New Member

    No. Then no one would ever run for office, except criminals who are willing to risk jail.
    The "penalty" is to vote them out of office and replace them with people who will uphold the Constitution. It's silly to keep voting for the same people then expecting there is some other method of disciplining them.

    Stop electing them.

    If Congress passes such a law, it is the job of courts to throw out the law, and our job to throw out the politicians. The system works fine.
  6. Vern Humphrey

    Vern Humphrey Active Member

    In other words, no different from the present system.;)
    Except that the career politicians have a lock -- it's almost impossible to vote them out, given all the advantages they have voted for themselves.
    So explain how we're running trillion dollar deficits, how the Congressman who was supposed to be overseeing Fannie Mae was sleeping with the vice-president of Fannie Mae (and never even got called on it) and how the President unconstitutionally stiffed General Motor's secured creditors (calling them "speculators") and never got a day in jail?
  7. 22-rimfire

    22-rimfire New Member

    Term limits! If there is no approved budget, the government shuts down until a budget is approved. The only thing that continues to be funded are the debt interest, the military and social security and medicare. No more automatic increases in spending for inflation. If the politicans can not find a way to agree on budget cuts... cut everything 10% and go from there. Next year, cut it again by 10%. Eventually the American people will see what's going on and rationale thought and actions will prevail.
  8. Vern Humphrey

    Vern Humphrey Active Member

    I agree with term limits.

    As for balancing the budget, how about this?
  9. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    How many mass shootings has NICS stopped recently? Cho at VATech purchased through NICS. Loughner (Giffords) purchased through NICS. The Aurora guy bought through NICS. The only person who didn't use NICS was Lanza, who murdered his own mother and took her guns.

    So, what do you guys think is going to happen WHEN there is another shooting? What are "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in!" going to do with that list of who owns what? Registration is also important to advance incremental gun control because once you know who owns what, you can target the politically weakest groups first.
  10. Bull Hockey
  11. BBQJOE

    BBQJOE Member

    When I purchase a firearm I show ID. I also show my CCW, which also leads to my fingerprints, and other pertinent info.
    They have my DOB, plus birth state, and a whole boatload of other info. including my address.

    They have the serial number and make of the firearm. They have answers to questions, any of which challenged could result in the loss of firearm ownership.

    I would have to be an absolute idiot to believe this information is not shared and permanently retained by the government.

    Anyone who honestly thinks that this info is destroyed in 24-72 hours, needs to have their firearms removed due to possible insanity.
  12. joeschmoe

    joeschmoe New Member

    Then stop voting for them. If you keep voting for them then you deserve them.
  13. wild cat mccane

    wild cat mccane New Member

    "Background checks will lead to registry."

    2 logical flaws: Necessary but not sufficient and slippery slope.

    Both are logical FLAWS.
  14. Cdigman

    Cdigman New Member

    Background Checks/Registration

    CNN did a ride-along with California LEOS, whose only job was to go seize guns. When someone in California gets convicted of a felony, are judged mentally incompetent, or get charged with domestic violence, they basically send you a notice to turn in your guns. Then, if it doesn't happen, they raid your house. Anderson Cooper was talking about what a great idea this was, and was incredulous that California is the only state that did this. That reason being that California has full registration. What would be scary is considering that someone can accuse you of being crazy, an alcoholic, a drug addict, or for a significant other to claim abuse, and they roll out the SWAT team to come get your firearms.
  15. Cdigman

    Cdigman New Member

  16. Vern Humphrey

    Vern Humphrey Active Member

    You really don't understand how our system works, do you?
  17. wild cat mccane

    wild cat mccane New Member

    I fail to see that as a problem.

    You openly admitted they were legally deemed not to possess a firearm due to LEGAL grounds.

    I work in the court system. Courts can't and don't just make laws up.
  18. joeschmoe

    joeschmoe New Member

    I don't understand why people keep voting for the same politicians but expecting different results. Or now hoping to send them to prison for reasons that should have kept them from re-election.
    We get the government we deserve. The system works fine. It's the people who vote for them that are to blame.
  19. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Was your post meant to be relevant or did you just want to dazzle us with your knowledge of traditional arguments and logic?

    First off, we are discussing background checks as currently conducted by the NICS system. The NICS system and 4473 is a non-centralized registry. If you force all sales to go through FFLs, you have forced all sales into a registry. So your first point is wrong unless you just wanted to share with us the logical truism that not every conceivable background check leads to a registry - which while a true statement, is not necessarily a useful one towards better understanding the current threats to RKBA.

    Your second statement of logic neglects to account for probability. In this case, we must make an educated guess about the intentions of our opponents - which fortunately they have clearly stated many times. In addition to Diane "Mr. and Mrs. America turn them all in", the state legislatures of New York and Hawaii have proposed using registration to confiscate and California already has used registration to confiscate*

    If your goal was to point out a slippery slope argument was being used, you might as well point out I am typing in English as well. It is every bit as helpful to an adult conversation and an analysis of the probability of that slippery slope argument in fact happening.

    *California declared the SKS an assault weapon and extended the period for gun owners to register. California was sued by Violence Policy Center who opposed the extension. California then confiscated every SKS registered during the extension.
  20. Vern Humphrey

    Vern Humphrey Active Member

    It's simple -- politicians use your money to bribe people to vote for them.

    You may recall there was a video floating around before the election of a lady saying, "I'm going to vote for Obama because he gave me a cell phone."

Share This Page