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

Checking the buyer without the gun. I could buy that.

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by gdcpony, Feb 3, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. mikechandler

    mikechandler Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Messages:
    97
    Yes, and child molestors should be given nanny licenses too. After all, they served their time, and they've paid their debt right?

    :fire:

    Maybe one-sized fits all felons is not so great, but let's not lie to ourselves - a good many of the people who travel the prison system's revolving door are truly bad eggs and arming them would be foolhardy.
     
  2. gbw

    gbw Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    621
    Location:
    Deep South
    Felons made their choices and the rules were available and clear beforehand.

    Re: the OP

    Checking the buyer only is a nice idea but unenforceable and so pointless. Think it through.

    Universal background check in any form would require registration of everything, including all existing guns. By Scalia's own opinion, Courts are very unlikely to prevent it.

    So what? Registration is nothing to fear. It's not infringement and it doesn't make confiscation more likely. If the gov't does get the power to confiscate they'll have the people and courts behind them - and it won't matter what is or isn't registered. At that point the game's over and lost.

    I cannot see a compelling objection to registration, or to a national non-expiring FOID that includes a background check and training first.

    And then a required check that the FOID is still valid, and registration, for every transfer - a simple phone call would do it.

    All of this would be a one time minor inconvenience, but it's not infringement.

    I do see that such a scheme, over time, can reduce the number of guns in the wrong hands, in untrained hands, or in impulse driven hands.

    Guns are by far the most dangerous, lethal objects commonly available to the general public, and among the most easily and commonly misused, too often with tragic results.

    Exercising our right to own them should a considered decision, and preceeded by some minimal show of responsibility.

    [I posted a version of this in Legal but Ettin shut it down before I could respond to the expected vituperative answers.

    Be polite, make your points and I'll try to answer them.]
     
  3. ngnrd

    ngnrd Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2010
    Messages:
    984
    Location:
    South Central Alaska
    Please clarify... registration of what, exactly?

    Registration of legally restricted persons? I might agree with the infringement part of the above statement. Although the confiscation part would have no merit in that case, because confiscation of illegally possessed firearms would kind of be the point, wouldn't it?

    Registration of legal owners? In my opinion, that is an infringement because "the list" could easily become "the watch list", and lead to confiscation "on suspicion of cause" without due process.

    Registration of firearms? I can think of no reason to maintain such a list, if not for use as a tool with which to assist in confiscation.
     
  4. gossamer

    gossamer Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Messages:
    421
    But hand wringing and allusions to Genocide in Nazi Germany doesn't hurt the RKBA cause at all...:banghead:
     
  5. mikechandler

    mikechandler Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Messages:
    97
    I disagree. Cars are by far the most dangerous , lethal objects, commonly available to the general public. Death by Auto > Death by all violent crime combined, both firearm and otherwise.

    Nevertheless, you are still more likely to die of colon cancer than by car or gunshot wound. Should we therefore register food?

    Here's something to get through your head: Life is a Mortal Condition. The only real question is the quality of life while you have it.

    On the Quality of Life scale, Liberty > Tyranny.

    You want to end slaughters like Newtown? Let's do away with Gun Free Zones (AKA Kill Zones). Or at least ones that depend upon the honor system.
     
  6. tgzzzz

    tgzzzz Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2013
    Messages:
    43
    Location:
    NC
    Hahahaha: the honor system. Good one!
     
  7. Trung Si

    Trung Si Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    169
    Location:
    Texas
    No,No and NO!:cuss:
     
  8. jcwit

    jcwit Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,011
    Location:
    Great state of Indiana
    So the slobbering idiot who's unable to walk a straight line with nothing more than milk in his system still deserves the "right" to own firearms. I question that for some reason.

    We all get checked for various reasons, I had a full background check to hold the clearances when I was in the service, I've been bonded for various reasons, I have a a LTC here in Indiana, FBI background check and state background required.

    A right is one thing, being able to exercise that right whether mentally or physically is an entire different matter.

    Now then the problem arises as to who does the deciding, and under what guidelines.
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2013
  9. gossamer

    gossamer Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Messages:
    421
    And food already comes with a Universal Background Check; it's called the ingredients list. Yet too few people actually use it to save their own lives. Soooo, we get to expend all this time and legislative energy on something that insures so little benefit our society; meanwhile people spend a lifetime ignoring the things far more likely to kill them early or ruin their quality of life staring them right in the face.

    /rant
     
  10. wickedsprint

    wickedsprint Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    Messages:
    583
    Location:
    S. Florida
    Remove violent felons from getting drivers license and merge the two. If you qualify for a DL you're allowed to buy guns.
     
  11. Trung Si

    Trung Si Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2009
    Messages:
    169
    Location:
    Texas
    jcwit! I question it also,BUT Today's Government is not the same as it was in our time, It is far more Intrusive and Overreaching and I don't Trust them anymore I was also in the Army, 1962-1969 have two Tours in Country and held a Security Clearance of "Secret" and they know enough about me already as far as I am concerned, but every Day they want more and more.
    They have NO Business of what own or want to own as long as I am not breaking existing Laws, Leave Me Alone!
     
  12. Sistema1927

    Sistema1927 Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    4,609
    Location:
    "Land of (dis)Enchantment"
    One more time, repeat after me: Criminals don't obey laws.

    So, why are you willing to accept any infringement?
     
  13. jcwit

    jcwit Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    8,011
    Location:
    Great state of Indiana
    Now that won't work well with the Amish, as they don't drive, by their own choice.

    I know, I know, and therein lies the conundrum.
     
  14. tgzzzz

    tgzzzz Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2013
    Messages:
    43
    Location:
    NC
    This works for me. How about one strike and you're out for these crimes? One appeal max. And make'm all Federal and capital crimes so we're not housing and feeding these lowlife for the rest of their lives.

    Recidivism? What recidivism?
    Wonder how much $ this would save?
    Why do we treat violent felons better than stray dogs?
    And not spend a fortune putting them down either. Just a couple of reloaded .38s= 50 cents a felon.:what:
    No offense intended to those of gentle sensibilities.
     
  15. Jay Kominek

    Jay Kominek Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    563
    Location:
    Boulder County, CO
    If you think the "rules" were clear beforehand, I don't think you have an appreciation for how long the list of rules is.

    http://www.threefeloniesaday.com/Youtoo/tabid/86/Default.aspx

    Being a "felon" means much less than it used to.
     
  16. tgzzzz

    tgzzzz Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2013
    Messages:
    43
    Location:
    NC
    Yes sir. My goofup.
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2013
  17. Jay Kominek

    Jay Kominek Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Messages:
    563
    Location:
    Boulder County, CO
    While certainly you were discussing divvy up felonious behavior into smaller categories, gbw (who I was responding to), does not seem to have said anything which would lead me to believe he was making a subtle or nuanced statement.
     
  18. firesky101

    firesky101 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Messages:
    1,433
    Location:
    California
    I read things like this and think... I wonder if he is joking. You sir need some smilies:neener:
     
  19. justice06rr

    justice06rr Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,597
    Location:
    Florida
    I really do not support any type of background check system for private face-to-face sales.

    The government just has to do a better job of catching the criminals, locking them up, and giving them more severe punishment/sentence.

    Not really.

    how about cars, cigarettes, or knives? I would bet more people die from car accidents, cancer, and suicides than from guns.
     
  20. gdcpony

    gdcpony Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    757
    Location:
    Sherrodsville, OH
    Since I posted this, I have done some thinking (dangerous for Marines). I still would be in favor of this in some form. I am not the guy with the brains to figure it all out. However, my position has always been that we get something in return. Get rid of the current system. We all KNOW it will soon be used to register. We also KNOW whether we admit it or not that BC's will always be here. So why not do it in such a way that we can swallow? It is really not a give to the gov't so much as a trade. We do this, but we do our way.
     
  21. X-Rap

    X-Rap Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,651
    We have given plenty and every "compromise" so far has been a loss for us. I say enforce the laws that we have like they promised when enacted and see how that goes.
     
  22. GambJoe

    GambJoe Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Messages:
    226
    Location:
    Richmond TX
    I could go along with back ground checks but with a compromise that the national record be destroyed. But there is always a hidden agenda. I saw Senators McCain and Schumer on the news last Sunday. Schumer want to retain those records for further investigation. To me this would cause a registry. Sooner or later this will lead to confiscation. By law don't sellers have to keep permanent record of their sales? That should be enough.
     
  23. AlexanderA

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,057
    Location:
    Virginia
    The "bipartisan plan" that appears to be under consideration by Manchin, Toomey, et al., is said to involve a check of the buyer but no record of the gun. If they go that route for non-FFL's, why not have it apply to purchases from FFL's as well? In other words, remove the gun information from the Form 4473 and simply have the buyer information on the form. That would be a "compromise," in that each side would give up something, in relation to the status quo. Oh, and BTW, repeal the Hughes Amendment.
     
  24. pockets

    pockets Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,134
    Location:
    in my own little world
    Your Ohio CCW does what?

    The Ohio CHL (Concealed Handgun License) does not take the place of a background check, it never has. . . . Mine sure hasn't.
    Every Ohioan who has an Ohio CHL must still fill out a 4473 and pass a background check when purchasing a firearm.
    The only exception I am aware of is for face-to-face sales.

    That said....I don't like the federal government's current checks, I certainly don't want to be named on a list in some new system.
    .
     
  25. gdcpony

    gdcpony Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    757
    Location:
    Sherrodsville, OH
    Haven't bought a firearm in OH since I got it. Thought it did. My bad. Either way I still wish it worked. It would simplify things for me instead of every time they have to call in.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page