Anti universal background check Oklahoma Senator sounding stupid

Status
Not open for further replies.
What other right can be infringed by us being required to get government approval before we can exercise that right? If exercise of a God given, and Constitutionally guaranteed right requires prior government approval, hasn't that right been destroyed and turned into a government granted privilege. Did you need to get a background check before you registered on this site to express your thoughts? Do journalists need government approval before they can write or report on news events? Do you need government approval before you can buy pencil and paper (or computer)? Do you need a background check before you go to your church?

If you use your rights to commit a crime, then you are punishable, but not before. We are not slaves; we are free men. The real risk we face is not from other free men, but from politicians and fellow citizens who don't believe in freedom or understand freedom, and can go through mental contortions to justify destroying rights, some on this site included.
 
I am a gun owner and I support universal checks.
You SAY you're a gun owner.

You support REGISTRATION, because that's the ONLY way that sham "universal background checks" can EVER be enforced.

Now tell everyone how REGISTRATION was used in Chicago to create and enforce a BAN.

Nobody's buying the B.S..

No registration.
No bans.
No confiscations.

NO, I REFUSE.
 
Notice how auto weapons are never used? why? Law.

No, it's because they proved to be inefficient in rounds per hit terms. Fully automatic weapons are difficult for most shooters to hold on target and just plain expensive to buy and operate.

But sure, it is illegal to commit murder with a fully automatic weapon. Or any other weapon.
 
then you object to the regulation of automatic weapons? Notice how auto weapons are never used?
REGISTERED automatic firearms are rarely used in crimes. Unregistered ones are.

Since you are such a big fan of the National Firearms Act, do you advocate that ALL firearms sales be subject to the same restrictions?

Should I need the approval of the "chief law enforcement officer" of my town in order to buy a handgun?

Again, you're not fooling ANYBODY.
 
Registration/any and all

Once the Government, any Government any country, has registration of anything it has control. Simple as that. All one has to do is take a look at how you as an American citizen are already registered with the Government. No need to name them but in all those registrations who has the final word, you are the government, state or federal?
 
We all know the wretched NFA's true purpose: To deter, dissuade, and inhibit ownership of anything deemed objectionable by the powers that be.

Public safety and crime prevention was and is a mere pretext.

Such an abomination constitutes a disadvantage for us in every sense of the word and must be done away with somehow.

Indeed, it remains to this day a road map for the exponents of domestic disarmament by showing them their ways around and through their problem of how to "regulate" the Bill of Rights into insignificance and oblivion!
 
Old Fuff said:
The background check wasn't what bill's supporters wanted. To them a complete hard-copy record detailing the gun owners personal details as well as specifics about the firearm (make, model, serial, description, etc.) was.

Our opponents deny that they want registration, but they are absolutely insistent that any new legislation creates more ownership records that are necessary for a registration system.
 
There is no "black market" for guns in America. How can there be if legal transactions don't require checks. That makes the "legal" market fraught with illegal transactions.

The neighborhood I grew in, the hoods got their guns illegally, often from bootleggers (we were "dry" until 1968, except for a few members-only clubs licensed by the state like Eagles and VFW). So "There is no "black market" for guns in America." fails the personal experience test.

Black market did not show up in the National Survey on Private Ownership and use of Firearms NSPOF used by the Obama administration for that infamous 40% stat, but it was a survey of random selected non-institutionalised citizens. Legal gun acquisitions represent the majority of the national gun market. Sources used by the average citizen were broken down by the (NSPOF):
NSPOF Survey: From whom did you acquire your gun?
43% Gun store
6% Pawnshop
11% Other store
4% Gun show or flea market
3% Through the mail (pre-1898 or muzzleloader)
17% Member of the family
12% Friend or acquaintance
4% Other
NSPOF Survey: How did you acquire your gun?
60% Retail purchase
13% Purchase from private party (used guns)
3% Swap or trade from private party (used guns)
19% Gift from family or friend
5% Inheritance
Notice that 40% non-store acquisition is not 40% sales at gun shows without a background check.

No mention of black market in the NSPOF survey; for black market, you have to survey state inmates or armed criminals.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics survey gave these as sources of guns possessed by state inmates:
13.9% Retail Sources:
8.3% Retail store
3.8% Pawnshop
1.0% Flea market
0.7% Gun show
39.6% Friends or family:
12.8% Purchase or trade
18.5% Rent or borrow
8.3% Other
39.2% Street/illegal source:
9.9% Theft or burglary
20.8% Drug dealer/street
8.4% Fence/black market

(I count drug dealers, fences, burglars with the black market. And "friends" of criminals are often criminals themselves. Sometimes family of criminals are also criminals.)

In the more focussed felon survey of 1,874 felons convicted of crimes while armed (Wright & Rossi, "Armed and Considered Dangerous"), about half of gun sources were street sales: fence, burglar, drug dealer, smuggler, black market; one-fourth were loans from fellow criminals ("friends" in the BJS survey); one-eighth were guns stolen for personal use and the remaining one-eighth or so were retail purchase at gun store or pawn shop by friend, lover or family member with no criminal record (usually "straw purchase").

While about 13% of "armed and considered dangerous" felons reported stealing guns for personal use, 40% of them reported stealing guns--for resale to fences or other criminals or trade with drug dealers. Sources stolen from included manufacturers, truck shipments, wholesalers, retailers, police and homes. Most of those sources would still exist under a total ban on civilian gun ownership.
 
[QUOTE The OP is nothing more than a troll. Lots of them planted on gun forums these days.][/QUOTE]
Another one of the 5000 proud Bull Moose-rs shilling for Sen Udall
 
Come on Carl, it doesn't matter what the facts are "if you can save just one life."
I'm fond of telling anti-gunners:

"It would be virtually impossible for most serial killers to operate if the United States adopted Soviet style internal passports and legally tied ones residence to their place of employment. If it would save just ONE life, wouldn't it be better to restrict your freedom of movement?"

I've never had a SINGLE ONE take me up on it.

Clearly, they're NOT interested in saving a LOT of lives, nevermind ONE, if guns AREN'T involved...
 
I'm fond of telling anti-gunners:

"It would be virtually impossible for most serial killers to operate if the United States adopted Soviet style internal passports and legally tied ones residence to their place of employment. If it would save just ONE life, wouldn't it be better to restrict your freedom of movement?"

I've never had a SINGLE ONE take me up on it.

Clearly, they're NOT interested in saving a LOT of lives, nevermind ONE, if guns AREN'T involved...
Dude it is scary how alike we think. I totally went off on the "if it saves just one life" crap yesterday on FB.
 
Still in effect BTW, YET the soviets did have a number of serial killers, they were either limited to: the immediate city, OR 'designated' lines of travel, and using their internal passports and the (HUGE) compiled information about who when where, they were usually (eventually) able to limit them to a small pool of possible people

Then again,the soviet ALSO happen to have the most voluminous mass murders, er executioners
 
Motion to BAN this troll!
Meh, let him spread his opinions. He's not winning over anybody here. People who supported the universal background check bill were genuinely mislead into thinking it would make somebody safer when the obvious reality is that neither of the last two shootings that started this debate would have been stopped by background checks.

It has zero to do with anything. It has everything to do with using a tragedy to forward an agenda that has been in the heads of quite a few political figures for years. They just overestimated the support they'd have behind them for gun control measures.
 
You got me if he is a troll or not. CNN told me the other day that 74% of all NRA gun owners think this is a good idea. I for one have a very hard time believing this. If they just keep saying it over and over it will eventually become truth to the low information voter.
 
You got me if he is a troll or not. CNN told me the other day that 74% of all NRA gun owners think this is a good idea. I for one have a very hard time believing this. If they just keep saying it over and over it will eventually become truth to the low information voter.
The only reason they think it is a good idea is because they've been mislead by the media and/or they're not seeing the full scope of what is going on.
 
"... It costs $7. ..." The private background check in Tennessee that has been around awhile is $30 but no real effort is made to publicize how to access it and it is largely unused. The D.C. private background check for guns is $125 but they are simply trying for no private transactions. Gun taxes are like poll taxes: an attempt to "regulate" a right into oblivion.

You don't have to hear the interview; NPR has a transcript at the link. I am not impressed with either of them.

"Coburn Proposal Would Make Buyer Prove Ability To Buy Guns", NPR, 18 Apr 2013.

NPR's Seigel interviewing Sen. Coburn of Oklahoma.

Coburn: "...if you've ever been to a gun show, the vast majority of guns sold at gun shows aren't sold by licensed dealers."

The gun shows I have attended at Meadowview Convention Center, the Kingsport Civic Auditorium, and Appalachian Fair Grounds, most vendors with guns ARE licensed dealers and HAVE run backgrpund checks and 4473 sale record, same procedure as at their storefront gunshop. Yes, private individuals do buy, sell or trade used guns at gun shows, but they (including me) have been the minority. Remember, gun shows used to be private collectors and general public only only and dealers were not allowed to set up shop by ATF regs.

Siegel: "But there seems to be some circular reasoning here. Wasn't the whole idea to try to extend background checks to transactions at gun shows?"

Dealer transactions--the majority of gun show sales--are already subject to the NICS background check. The circular reasoning is the claim by the Obama administration that NSPOF "40% of non-dealer acquisitions" are sales at gun shows without background checks, when gun shows and flea markets were only 4% of all NSPOF gun acquisitions.

As far as us gun nuts having an unfounded fear that the Democrats want make a gun registry, try this article in the wake of Newtown:
http://www.newrepublic.com/blog/plank/111266/franklin-roosevelt-the-father-gun-control#
Adam Winkler, "Franklin Roosevelt: The Father of Gun Control", The New Republic, 19 Dec 2012.
Gun control is one of the great pieces of unfinished business for the Democratic Party. ... Like health care, social security, and so many other issues central to the Democratic agenda, the party’s support for gun control stems from Franklin D. Roosevelt. ... Roosevelt’s original proposal for what would become the National Firearms Act of 1934, the first federal gun control law, sought to tax all firearms and establish a national registry of guns. ....
FDR as a New York Democrat saw the NY Sullivan Act as a model of gun control for the nation. It was FDR's 1934 National Firearms Act and 1938 Federal Firearms Act that promoted the NRA to get involved in defending the Second Amendment.

Wiki- The New Republic (TNR) is a liberal American magazine of commentary on politics and the arts published continuously since 1914
TNR- Adam Winkler is a professor at UCLA School of Law and the author of Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America.
 
then you object to the regulation of automatic weapons? Notice how auto weapons are never used? why? Law.

What a preposterous hypothesis. Law? It's against the law to blow up a bomb at the Boston Marathon. Did that stop them? It's against the law to commit murder with a knife, firearm, rope, truck or sewer gas. Does that prevent murder?

You have no idea what you're talking about.

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." - Abraham Lincoln
 
Crimes are committed with illegal machineguns. For example, the North Hollywood Bank Robbery. Alan Berg was assassinated by a white supremacist gang with a illegal machinegun made for them by a white supremacist group called Covenant Sword and Arm of the Lord that made machineguns for other groups.

The claim that no legally registered machine guns are used in crime points out the fact that legal owners are lawabiding citizens who don't commit crimes. Even though no legally registered machine guns are used in crime, the Democrats used the Hughes Amendment to close the NFA registry to new machineguns in 1986, freezing the legal number at that point in time. If semi-auto military replica rifles are made NFA, watch for a limited amnesty window for registration, then a closure of the registry to new guns.
 
The NSPOF survey used by the Obama administration for the claim that 40% of gun sales are at gun shows without a background check, is available here:
http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/165476.txt
http://www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles/165476.pdf
The PDF version includes the graphs. It was a fairly big random survey of 2,568 gun owners, conducted by Chiltons for the Police Foundation under a grant from National Institute of Justice. It is old: it is the survey used in 1997 for Clinton Administration gun policies. But it is the survey used by the current admin for the 40% figure. However, the number of gun owners reporting buying a gun between Nov 1991 and Dec 1994 was 251 of the total sample.

Caroline Wolf Harlow, "Firearm Use by Offenders", Bureau of Justice Statistics, 4 Nov 2001, NCJ 189369.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fuo.pdf
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/fuo.txt
Over 14,000 state inmates were interviewed for this project.
 
Last edited:
If they opened the NFA
I'd convert EVERYTHING I own...
just because

As for the 40% number, it's pretty bad when the anti gun WaPa give's 4 Pinocchio's for an agenda they are pushing...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top