Gun show loophole?

[SuperNaut]

The world has learned from that lesson

Not even close.

 

[larryh1108]

...if once the sale is consummated, the info would then be required to be destroyed,...

<snicker>

And you'd trust the government to promise to destroy them?

I doubt that there is one man or woman on these forums that believes they would be destroyed. I'm sure there are gullible anti-gun people who believe, with every cell in their body, that the government would do as promised. We all know they have volumes of information that was supposed to be destroyed already. This is the same government that spied on it's own people in the name of national security. We can talk about Eric Holder, the IRS, etc. The government lies like we breathe air,,,, effortlessly.

 

[buck460XVR]

The anti-gun cult is nothing BUT deception.

As I've said many times before, "I can't make them stop lying, but they can't make me believe them either."

You really think the soccer mom that says all she wants is for her 3rd grader to be safe at school is lying to us? That the father that buried his child because of random shooting violence and claims" it should have never happened" is trying to deceive us? If you really believe that, whatever you are smoking is illegal. You accuse the antis of lying and making false claims, but then do the same thing yourself. This is why many folks neutral to gun ownership no longer listen to anything we say.....because we lower ourselves to the level of our opposition and are no better than they are. False blanket claims such as yours do nothing to help our cause or to promote responsible gun ownership. Only makes us all look like idiots. Kinda like those folks that believed in Aryan superiority.


Again, I don't agree with mandatory UBCs or any of the other possible scenarios that many think would go along with them. But I don't think that lying and making false accusations that others are always lying and making false accusations is going to keep them from happening.

 

[Salmoneye]

I doubt very much that UBCs will stop the illegal use of firearms to any great degree or keep them out of the hands of criminals.

You admit they are worthless, yet you are 'for' them because 'background checks' are used in other facets of life...

ADDING from later in thread:

Again, I don't agree with mandatory UBCs or any of the other possible scenarios that many think would go along with them.

Then exactly what are you saying here:

But as I said before, background checks are done for reasons other than buying a firearm. Take out a loan, try to rent an apartment, apply for a job in a school, for the government or anywhere around minor children. It is a tool that is accepted as a norm for the majority of Americans, even tho it's effectiveness is not shown to be 100% effective. It's no wonder so many folks think of it as a non-issue.

If I am misunderstanding your position or mischaracterizing it in the first quote, I apologize...

Just trying to understand your position...

 

[Deanimator]

You really think the soccer mom that says all she wants is for her 3rd grader to be safe at school is lying to us?

She's being lied TO, and ignorantly repeating those lies to other ignorant people.

That's why I spare NO effort toward proving that the anti-gun cult ARE liars.

But of course she's no more driving this thing than a housewife in Darmstadt was driving Babi Yar.

Appeasement didn't prevent Babi Yar, nor will it prevent registration, bans and confiscation.

As a famous failed seminarian once said, "Not one step back."

NO, I REFUSE.

 

[larryh1108]

The lies being spewed aren't the parents/families of the victims. They want and need to understand why their loved one died. Now, the MSM and anti-gun crowd tells the victim's family that they lost their loved one because guns are evil and owning guns makes that person evil. The lies are from the politicians who call out against gun show loopholes and assault weapons where there are neither in the real world. The MSM and politicians paint us all as crazed rednecks because we won't go along with common-sense compromises when in reality it's a one-way street.

Yes, they all (MSM and politicians and the anti-gun zealots) lie. They lie because they don't care to be truthful about their agenda... to take away ever gun we own. Victim's families don't lie... they hurt and the anti-gun people are all too happy to put their pain out there as headlines and speeches.
I'm still waiting for Obama to get in front of the cameras and show his pain about the recent travesty where a woman ran over a whole lot of people.

 

[njl]

Here's the fallacy of the gun show loop hole.
Look at every one of the mass shooting in the last few years.
Every shooter would have passed a background check.

Yeah they want your guns

AFS

Supposedly Dylann Roof's purchase should have been rejected by the NICS check that was done, but the FBI F'd up and approved him. No new gun control laws are going to insure errors of that sort don't happen in the future.

The fallacy here is that the laws in place aren't preventing mass killings, so we need more [restrictive] laws.

 

[Deanimator]

I'm still waiting for Obama to get in front of the cameras and show his pain about the recent travesty where a woman ran over a whole lot of people.

I'm still waiting for him to offer his condolences to the family of a young woman murdered by an illegal alien, illegally allowed to stay here in a "sanctuary city", using a GOVERNMENT OWNED gun.

 

[buck460XVR]

You admit they are worthless, yet you are 'for' them because 'background checks' are used in other facets of life...

ADDING from later in thread:



Then exactly what are you saying here:



If I am misunderstanding your position or mischaracterizing it in the first quote, I apologize...

Just trying to understand your position...

My position is simple. I don't agree with UBCs for the purchase of firearms, because I see no value in them for stopping crime or firearm violence. Re-read everything I have posted...I have never said I am "for" them.

I point out the fact that background checks are done for many other purposes other than firearm purposes and because of this, some folks seem to think they should work for firearm purchases. The point? Just because I don't believe in UBCs for firearm purchases, doesn't mean I don't understand why some folks do, even if their thinking is incorrect. Doesn't automatically make them liars, and the facts show us it doesn't automatically make them anti-gun....just pro-UBC.

But of course she's no more driving this thing than a housewife in Darmstadt was driving Babi Yar.

Every time she votes, she is driving this and other issues. Chest beating and posturing on internet forums doesn't change laws or the priorities of our elected officials, voting does. Some folks have a hard time comprehending this.

 

[gbran]

I don't believe UBC's would have any impact on crime. I have a better idea;

We can and do track violent crime. Anybody with a violent crime conviction found to possess a firearm gets a penalty sufficient to discourage them.

People ADJUDICATED mentally and found with a firearm to get some other appropriate restraint.

Everybody else should have no restrictions. I'm just not concerned Martha Stewart is gonna come gunning for anybody.

 

[Deanimator]

Chest beating and posturing on internet forums doesn't change laws or the priorities of our elected officials, voting does.

JUST voting DOESN'T.

You have to show people that they're not just being lied to, but being co-opted into spreading lies themselves.

 

[Salmoneye]

I point out the fact that background checks are done for many other purposes other than firearm purposes and because of this, some folks seem to think they should work for firearm purchases. The point? Just because I don't believe in UBCs for firearm purchases, doesn't mean I don't understand why some folks do, even if their thinking is incorrect. Doesn't automatically make them liars, and the facts show us it doesn't automatically make them anti-gun....just pro-UBC.

Thanks,

I see what you are saying now...

 

[jim in Anchorage]

Some interesting points here, but I would like to keep this on these subjects.
If UBC are required will 100% gun registration be passed to enforce it?[the only way it can work.]
Do you have any concerns about 100% gun registration?

Some of you don't seem to mind the idea of registration.

 

[Deanimator]

If UBC are required will 100% gun registration be passed to enforce it?[the only way it can work.]

That's the entire PURPOSE of sham "universal background checks". They're INTENDED to fail, whereupon REGISTRATION will be "needed" to "fix" them.

Do you have any concerns about 100% gun registration?

No one should... unless they have "concerns" about bans and confiscation.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Like I said, depending on where you live, a UBC is coming. It's just a matter of time. When you have as many people as we do that want them, you can bet that more will come. It's a slam dunk for the AG crowd with that much support. They spent 10 million dollars in WA to get one passed here last year and the gun owners helped them pass it. We have people right here on this forum that support UBC's and registration. Seems pretty much inevitable to me.

The only thing that might be advisable here is to consider what kind of UBC you get. Do you target everyone that seeks care from a mental health professional? Do you retain the records so the FBI can build a database with names, addresses and firearms? They would like to do both. Obama has been trying to repeal the Tiahrt amendment ever since it became law.

Just a few things to think about.

 

[Spats McGee]

Like I said, depending on where you live, a UBC is coming. It's just a matter of time. When you have as many people as we do that want them, you can bet that more will come. It's a slam dunk for the AG crowd with that much support. They spent 10 million dollars in WA to get one passed here last year and the gun owners helped them pass it. We have people right here on this forum that support UBC's and registration. Seems pretty much inevitable to me.

The only thing that might be advisable here is to consider what kind of UBC you get. Do you target everyone that seeks care from a mental health professional? Do you retain the records so the FBI can build a database with names, addresses and firearms? They would like to do both. Obama has been trying to repeal the Tiahrt amendment ever since it became law.

Just a few things to think about.

I respectfully disagree. I don't think it's quite the slam dunk that you apparently do. With that said, however, fending them off is going to mean that we have to take the fight to the AG crowd. IMHO, this is particularly true in the social media arena. Social media, from what I can see, is disproportionately populated by the young, urban, and liberal crowds, which tend to have AG leanings. (Not that I've done any kind of statistical research on that. Just my observations/opinions.)

 

[Deanimator]

Like I said, depending on where you live, a UBC is coming.

It isn't coming to Ohio, now or any time soon. Ohio isn't Washington.

Those who plan for defeat usually achieve it.

NO, I REFUSE.

 

[buck460XVR]

Here's a recent poll of randomly selected voters. Even Republicans are in favor by an overwhelming percentage. Are we being lied to? One can fudge poll results a few percentage points one way or the other....... but 93% is a bit too much to fudge.

 

[Deanimator]

Here's a recent poll of randomly selected voters. Even Republicans are in favor by an overwhelming percentage.

"In favor" of WHAT???

I've found that in almost ALL cases, when you tell them what the REAL goals are, they turn negative, VERY negative.

"Universal background check" is like "separate but equal" and "resettlement to the east". Support goes WAY down when people know what's REALLY being planned.

 

[Praxidike]

Here's a recent poll of randomly selected voters. Even Republicans are in favor by an overwhelming percentage. Are we being lied to? One can fudge poll results a few percentage points one way or the other....... but 93% is a bit too much to fudge.

How where the participates polled? How many where polled. Common sense should tell you that something doesn't pass the smell test with that one.

 

[Deanimator]

How where the participates polled? How many where polled. Common sense should tell you that something doesn't pass the smell test with that one.

You know you're not supposed to ask those kinds of questions.

Just shut up, obey and don't do too much thinking.

 

[buck460XVR]

How where the participates polled? How many where polled. Common sense should tell you that something doesn't pass the smell test with that one.

Maybe you missed it. Look again. It's in bold blue print at the top of the page. No smell test needed.

1574 registered voters....nationwide.

Support goes WAY down when people know what's REALLY being planned.

The above chart shows the polling from the previous two years besides this years. The percentage of those in favor of UBCs has actually gone up over the years. Is the message not getting out or is the wrong argument being implemented. Surprising that 9 out of 10 folks are being convinced by lies year after year.

Not my poll, not my chart. Don't kill the messenger. Obviously not a poll of active members from internet gun forums, but of random nationwide voters. Again, I don't agree with these folks, but I do accept the fact there are so many that do. Hiding your head in the sand is not going to make it go away. Denying obvious facts don't change them. I give credit to our present lawmakers that have no relented to obvious pressure to enact new legislation concerning UBCs.

 

[Deanimator]

The above chart shows the polling from the previous two years besides this years. The percentage of those in favor of UBCs has actually gone up over the years. Is the message not getting out or is the wrong argument being implemented. Surprising that 9 out of 10 folks are being convinced by lies year after year.

Where are they going to get the truth? MSNBC?

You tell me where in the mainstream media they're going to get the truth.

That doesn't change the fact that they're being lied to, but when they know that, things change dramatically.

 

[suemarkp]

Some interesting points here, but I would like to keep this on these subjects.
If UBC are required will 100% gun registration be passed to enforce it?[the only way it can work.]
Do you have any concerns about 100% gun registration?

Some of you don't seem to mind the idea of registration.

Who knows what would be passed. But the anti gun people have always wanted registration so I could see them including it. Like I said earlier, registration is not required to make it work, but a lot of time has to go by to get many of the pre-UBC guns out of circulation. All post-UBC guns should have a traceable provenance.

And there will most likely be some loopholes. In WA, we have the bequeathed guns exception. And you can give it to an immediate family member as a bonafide gift and skip the UBC. These all lower the effectiveness of UBC (because they aren't universal), but give you some options if you want something with a broken paper trail. The anti gunners may try to eliminate all of those, but it probably won't pass without some exceptions.

I definitely have concerns about registration.

Hopefully the NRA will be more on the ball when this comes up in other states or at the federal level. I think they didn't worry about it in WA thinking we're usually pretty pro gun here. I urged all family members to vote no, but it passed easily. Too many people just don't pay attention to details.

 

[Salmoneye]

Maybe you missed it. Look again. It's in bold blue print at the top of the page. No smell test needed.

1574 registered voters....nationwide.

That were listed in the phone book, and were at home in major urban areas between the hours of 10 and 11 AM on a Tuesday...

See how easy it is to get 1500+ 'registered voters nationwide'?

The percentage of those in favor of UBCs has actually gone up over the years.

Nowhere in that chart is the term 'Universal Background Checks' used, defined, or asked as a question...

Smoke and mirrors...