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

Email from Obama | They are making a stand for universal background checks

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

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JRH6856

    JRH6856 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    Messages:
    3,828
    Location:
    Flower Mound, TX
    And when the Surgeon General or the CDC determines that the desire to own a machine gun is an indicator of mental illness?
     
  2. Solo

    Solo Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2004
    Messages:
    838
    The DSM-V will be out by then, and will not include the desire to own an automatic weapon as a criteria of mental illness.
     
  3. barnbwt

    barnbwt Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    6,808
    The usual place, I'm sure :D

    I find it very informative to simply "redact" all numbers that come out of the Obama camp at this point (our 1.2% inflation is actually 9% by 1980 CPI calcs, for instance) as they are basically used in place of actual arguments. That slick little infographic/advertisement whatever you call it doesn't have a single reason for why we actually need background checks--all it asserts is that we supposedly "want" background checks. And even that is bogus.

    If we all want background checks, why the hell do you need to tell us that? It's same as using the "common sense", "reasonable" etc. words to describe all their positions. If their stances were actually so, why would they need to constantly reinforce that perception?

    TCB

    *Does anyone else think that graphic looks like it should be advertising hamburgers?
     
  4. montanaoffroader

    montanaoffroader Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2011
    Messages:
    523
    Location:
    Big Sky Country
    First comes the "universal background check" which will require locating an FFL willing to do a transfer and paying an outrageous fee (If you think fees in most areas won't increase because of this, then you are nuts!). Then the ATF will be ordered to "tighten up" the FFL rules, eliminating most smaller "kitchen table" type FFL holders and imposing higher license fees and more restrictions on all FFL's, making it even harder to find an FFL willing to do transfers.

    Also, expect lawsuits against FFL's offering private party transfers if any of the firearms transferred in this way are used in any crime at all.

    I won't even get into the mental health aspects of this, I'll leave that one for someone else. :rolleyes:
     
  5. CmdrSlander

    CmdrSlander Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,203
    Location:
    Disputed Western Missouri
    IIRC, there is a law against suing gun makers and gun dealers for what a third party uses their products to do.

    It was put in place after some ratbast**d lawyer in the 80-90s nearly sued Smith and Wesson into oblivion by suing them for any injury/homicide he could find that was committed with an S&W firearm, this was during the Brady bill/AWB hysteria and his goal was to single-handedly bring down the gun industry, had a law banning his practices not been passed the liability insurance required to make and sell guns would have driven up the price of firearms so much that they would have become the exclusive preserve of the super rich and he would have been successful.
     
  6. Cal-gun Fan

    Cal-gun Fan Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,164
    Location:
    Utah/California
    I don't see what the fuss over background checks is for. I doubt any of us want criminals and the certified mentally ill getting firearms, so I'm fine with filling out a background check if it means it will be harder for them to get a gun.
     
  7. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    UBC will be their main thrust. If they can get a ban on semi-autos or magazines on top of that, they will not hesitate to do so. I wouldn't relax too much thinking that those options are off the table. They are both still possibilities.

    And the fuss over Universal Background Checks is that it is very difficult to create a system that does this using the current structure that does not allow itself to be abused for gun registration. When somebody tells you they don't want you to have firearms, that they should be taken from you by force if necessary and then says "OK, just tell us the number and types of guns you have as a compromise."

    Many of us see that as a sucker's deal.
     
  8. Bob M.

    Bob M. Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2007
    Messages:
    213
    Location:
    Tampa, Fl
    The Evolution of Gun Control: 1. Legislation 2. Registration 3. Confiscation 4. Extermination.
     
  9. montanaoffroader

    montanaoffroader Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2011
    Messages:
    523
    Location:
    Big Sky Country
    The problem is not with the basic concept of a universal background check, it is with the implementation. If the NICS system was simply opened to the general public, I would have no problem with "universal" background checks.

    The problem I have with all of the current proposals is that they require you to involve a 3rd party in the transaction. Not only is it none of their business, it will involve spending considerable time and money just to be able sell your own personal property to another citizen. Out here, many people don't have an FFL at all within a reasonable distance. If it becomes too difficult transfer a privately owned firearm, many will just ignore the rules.

    Also, there is currently no way for the government to know who owns what, so how will the government know if an illegal transfer has taken place?
     
  10. CmdrSlander

    CmdrSlander Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,203
    Location:
    Disputed Western Missouri
    The fuss is that it would make it possible for the government to end lawful private gun ownership in the US by giving them total control over the transfer of firearms...

    All they would have to do if we had UBC is defund NICS and boom, no more gun sales and transfers. All they would have to do then is wait for the current two or three generations of gun owners to die off, their children being unable to receive their firearms, would probably turn them in. Don't believe they would? What if you found an off paper MP40? Would you take it home and lock it up or would you immediately contact the ATF because you don't want to go to Federal Prison and ruin your family? I know what I would do.

    What I would support is making NICS open to all via a smarthpone app and automated phone number, so I could do an NICS check, voluntarily on my private sales. I would do it, and I would relish the peace of mind. They should be making background checks easier to carry out for all involved parties, not pushing them in such a way that forces us to fight them.

    This is what happens to private citizens that dare to hold on to firearms the Feds and the ATF say they should not have...

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2013
  11. Cal-gun Fan

    Cal-gun Fan Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,164
    Location:
    Utah/California
    I think that's quite a stretch.
     
  12. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    Our current system can be used to determine who purchased a specific gun; but is too manpower intensive to be used for confiscation. See: http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_registration.html

    As for opening up NICS, NICS was specifically forbidden to everyone on a bipartisan basis due to privacy concerns. If anyone can check at will whether you are a prohibited person or not, lots of people will want to satisfy their curiousity.

    Your own state has ALREADY used registration to confiscate registered firearms on several occasions and you think that is a stretch?
     
  13. CmdrSlander

    CmdrSlander Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,203
    Location:
    Disputed Western Missouri
    Oh yes, it is.

    I'm totally paranoid....

    Perhaps they wouldn't use it to end private firearms ownership but they could certainly take it hostage... imagine another Sandy Hook occurs in a universal bcg nation, the president could, by EO, say "The gun control in this country is broken, there will be no more gun sales until congress compromises and institutes reforms."

    If you think that is far fetched, consider that Clinton destroyed millions of vintage M1911s, M1903s and M1s instead of allowing the CMP to sell them for no other reason but to spite the gun culture. You have to be a member of a gun club to buy from the CMP, criminals would never had access to these firearms but he did it anyway, as a show of his resolve.

    More reasonably, I don't like giving the government more control over anything. The NCIS system needs to be improved and private systems need access to it. UBC are very easy to thwart. Do you honestly believe a determined mass killer is going to be stopped by a background check? In about an hour I could find someone willing to sell me narcotics, do you think it would be that hard to find someone willing to sell me an AR15 without a background check?
     
    Last edited: Feb 9, 2013
  14. CmdrSlander

    CmdrSlander Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,203
    Location:
    Disputed Western Missouri

    Truth. There it is.
     
  15. CmdrSlander

    CmdrSlander Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,203
    Location:
    Disputed Western Missouri
    You know there are background check websites that will do the same thing for you if you have the cash?

    Perhaps we could set it up to use driver's license numbers instead of name/state/address so you have to be face to face with the person and they have to give you information that you couldn't easily know off hand (I know my friends names and states, I have no idea what their DL numbers are).
     
  16. Steel Horse Rider

    Steel Horse Rider Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2012
    Messages:
    2,105
    Location:
    Loveland, Colorado
    All you have to do is put the state of residence into the equation in order to understand the perspective of Cal-Gun Fan, he was deprived of his natural rights long ago so he cannot miss something he doesn't have..... Perspective is the key to understanding.
     
  17. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    Those sites are just databases of publically available courthouse information. This is not the same as accessing NICS, which is an FBI-maintained database that may include some information that isn't publically available (which raises another issue concerning security of law enforcement investigations if NICS is publically available). I'd also note that if those private websites are any example, you'd be talking about a fee of $50-100 to transfer a firearm - which is a pretty substantial barrier to those with less discretionary cash.
     
  18. rugerman

    rugerman Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    546
    Location:
    Auburn, Alabama
    I would like to say that I'm an American, a life member of the NRA and a Republican and I don't support anything that the Liar in Chief supports. I also have never been polled on this subject and don't know of ANYONE who has been. And I also think that our government is going down the wrong road real fast.
     
  19. FJRBob

    FJRBob Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2012
    Messages:
    9
    When I applied for my concealed carry license in Arkansas they did a complete backround check and since then whenever i purchase a firearm all I do is show my CCL sign a form and I'm gone. Question will they if this passes (I hope not) have to run another check or only list the weapon I am purchasing? Sometimes I am a little dense, must come with old age. Thanks Bob Ramos..
     
  20. blaisenguns

    blaisenguns Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2009
    Messages:
    445
    Well universal background checks, go hand in hand with registration. I am glad I sold all my guns. To bad all the people I sold them to have been in the obituary the last couple years, so they can not back it up.
     
  21. HankR

    HankR Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2011
    Messages:
    524
    Location:
    upper midwest
    (emphasis added)


    I don't need to read the "fine print" to realize that universal background checks == total registration == eventual confiscation. The only questions remaining, as alluded to above, is do they shoot your dog and your wife before they burn your [strike]house [/strike] compound or after?
     
  22. hueytaxi

    hueytaxi Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Messages:
    141
    Location:
    Lakeland, Fl
    The truth in UBC's. If granted to apply to all gun transfers there will be no borrowing a gun at the range for a moment, much less borrowing one to take hunting. take iin your gun for repair, and have to run a UBC on the armorer? Forget teaching your 11 y/o kid to shoot unless you run a UBC on him and let's not even think about handing down family heirlooms in your will. How could you ever have a gun auction?
     
  23. HOOfan_1

    HOOfan_1 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    4,698
    Location:
    Virginia
    I am sure that statement has been made by many a doubter just before a totalitarian regime has taken over.

    Most free societies do not fall all at once, but a little at a time, and the "not my problem" and the "oh well I guess I can live with that" crowd just sit by and let it happen
     
  24. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    On the plus side, all of the guns you own before any UBC is passed will be much more valuable since they are effectively unregistered. Of course, that extra value would only be realized if they were sold on the black market; but I'm sure if you make someone's current collection worth two or three times its value while allowing them to replace it at regular prices, nobody will be tempted to sell the untrackable stuff on the black market and replace it through an FFL and pocket the difference.
     
  25. JayBird

    JayBird Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    121
    Uh yeah. Cause background checks have clearly stopped the mass shooters of late from getting their hands on guns. And background checks clearly stop criminals from getting their hands on guns. /rollseyes

    I'm sorry, but I dont want the rest of the country to go the route that your home state has. I like my freedoms.

    Let individual states decide how state residents can sell their private property to other residents that also reside in the same state. That is kinda how The Constitution was written. One of the worst things about a federal law banning private sales would be just one more stretch of the old commerce clause.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page