This Forum used to be "The High Ground"

[bushmaster1313]

For a good long while, this Forum earned its moniker.
Now it seems that anyone who dares to agree that universal background checks are a good idea is vilified as someone not worthy of their opinion.

Fine, you know where I stand, if you have any reasoned comments that could change my mind I am open to hearing them.

However, I miss the old "High Ground."

 

[M-Cameron]

you come to a gun forum and flog your anti-ideals and are surprised when people arent lining up to accept you with open arms.......what a shocker!

 

[BHP FAN]

You should try telling folks ''it's magazines...not clips''...you'll get called all sorts of things. Seriously though, you have a right to say anything. We have a right not to agree with you.

 

[philobeddoe]

Man, this happens on all the forums, someone starts bellyachin' that it ain't like it was back in the day. So someone disagreed with you on the Internet. They probably have Cheetos stains on their Jockeys. Let it go.

Cheers.

 

[Kubrick]

1) will private sellers have access to NICS?

2) will it be free?

3) do we have to use the same 4473 form like a dealer? Do we have to keep said form for 20 years?

I have the right to sell my personal property to another person without jumping through a lot of hoops.

 

[19-3Ben]

You're entitled to whatever opinions you want.

The problem is, you keep proposing them to us asking us to accept them as good ideas and then you get all butt-hurt when we disagree with you. All we're doing is disagreeing. Not vilifying you.

 

[joeschmoe]

Still... NO!

 

[NaturalDefensiveRights]

Will you listen to reason? I ask, because if you're absolutely convinced it's a good idea, it's unlikely anyone will change your mind. The only thing that would change your mind is being part of history in which guns are eventually confiscated, destroyed, or made illegal. But by then, you'll be so domesticated and accustomed to all the bureaucracy, you probably won't even care.

 

[patriot9879]

My aversion to universal background checks is due to the fact that they would have done nothing to prevent the two high profile mass shootings last year. So I see them as an another tool that our corrupt govt will use to prevent law abiding citizens from owning firearms, thereby increasing their power and our servitude. I think that the animosity towards our fellow members on this site is due to our feeling that this is not a time for compromise since any compromise will only result in a reduction of our rights and freedoms as law abiding citizens.

 

[BK]

universal background checks are a good idea

It's not that your belief isn't allowed here, it's that it is an encroachment upon a human right. If I were to declare that the press should not be allowed to print anything unless they could first prove to the government that what they were printing met an arbitrary standard, then you could obviously see that I did not fully understand the freedom of the press.

 

[Waywatcher]

Bushmaster1313, agreed.

 

[Larry Ashcraft]

The "High Ground"? Never heard of it.

Your anti-gun arguments will not fly here.

 

[gbran]

The goal is registration, universal background checks are a step in that direction.

 

[Waywatcher]

The "High Ground"? Never heard of it.

Your anti-gun arguments will not fly here.

Your reply is as thin as a clip/magazine correctionist. That it comes from a moderator leads me to agree all the more with the OP.

I surely don't pass an ideological purity test, and I am ok with that.

 

[bayesian]

But maybe we could merge all of these threads into one big 'you think i suck? no, you suck' thread and be done with it.

At least the solvent arguments would occasionally contain useful information even if it was all "Hoppe's sucks, use Ballistol rules even if it smells like ass..."

Oh right, wrong area...

 

[mljdeckard]

Some people need to learn the difference between their ideas being criticized, and their being criticized personally.

Seriously, your opinions invite ridicule, don't act surprised.

 

[jerkface11]

You support gun control. I don't see why you expect the majority of the people here to agree with you.

 

[M-Cameron]

another thing to remember.....The High ROAD is a place where we can talk in a somewhat civilized manor and discuss ideas without bashing, name calling...


....it does not mean we have to agree with your ideas, or that you are free from criticism....



if you think THR is bad, good luck on some of the other forums.....they can be downright brutal and even threatening at times.......feel free to try some of them and then you can complain how bad it is here.

 

[BHP FAN]

on first blush, it sounds like a damn good idea, I mean who wants bad guys to get guns, right? then you realise it shuts down person to person sale, or gifting a gun to your grandson without going through a dealer, then you have taken the BG check into National Gun Regisrty territory, and no one wants a list of the guns they own in Eric Holders hands....and then you've opened a whole can of Gummi Worms.

 

[nearmiss]

How about because the federal government doesn't have the right to regulate firearms at all. "shall not" is an absolute. If a state wants to require universal background checks, it can, but point to the article, section, phrase, or clause, in the constitution that gives the feds the right to regulate firearms in any way. It's not there.

 

[Tinker]

I think that "common sense" ideas like universal background checks are the "low road" to a weakened Second Ammendment.

 

[meanmrmustard]

Your reply is as thin as a clip/magazine correctionist. That it comes from a moderator leads me to agree all the more with the OP.

I surely don't pass an ideological purity test, and I am ok with that.

The truth hurts. Pro gun control discussion is raising some eyebrows with members, wondering why on earth does somebody offer support of gun control, then post it on a pro gun forum?

That a moderator said it too isn't thin, hell, Larry's late to that party; we've been tossing the ball back and forth since Wednesday.

You have the right to agree with Bushy. We have the right to not. Seeing as this is a firearms forum, feathers will get ruffled spouting anti-venom (play on words?) here.

 

[BK]

a clip/magazine correctionist.

If you had bet me money that there were gun owners that took the whole magazine/clip thing personally, I would have lost!

 

[Kiln]

Require background checks for freedom of speech.

Words are dangerous and could be spoken by people that disagree with the federal government.

Pass background checks to ensure that bad guys aren't using free speech.

 

[r1derbike]

on first blush, it sounds like a damn good idea, I mean who wants bad guys to get guns, right? then you realise it shuts down person to person sale, or gifting a gun to your grandson without going through a dealer, then you have taken the BG check into National Gun Regisrty territory, and no one wants a list of the guns they own in Eric Holders hands....and then you've opened a whole can of Gummi Worms.

Gummi Worms, disguised as deadly pit-vipers.

Anything in Eric Holder's hands is an absolute travesty of justice. And THAT is The High Road.