#stopgunviolence

[lucky_blue]

So in other words a background check. And I would sure expect something more authoritative than just asking.

Why is it that the NRA is so opposed to background checks?

Very simple.

Every regime that has confiscated privately owned firearms started with background checks and a "gun registry"

Background checks are a liberal feel good measure, criminals will simply find other ways to obtain weapons. The only people who will submit to background checks are already law abiding citizens.

It is very clear that Obama favours firearm confiscation and bans. The only things that stand in his way are little things like the Constitution and political opposition.

It always amazes me that liberals will support policies that make them feel good about themselves even if they have no or the opposite effect in the real world.

Banning and confiscating firearms from law abiding citizens can only serve to increase criminal gun violence.

 

[basketcase]

Well actually no . A background check is only good for the moment that the check is done . You can have a PAL ( background checked ) and be a criminal later on . A PAL is good for 5 years . A lot can happen to a person in 5 years .

.

On one hand a system that prevents the majority of criminals and mentally unstable from getting guns. On the other, a suggestion that all you need is the buyer's word. Hmm. Which system seems more sensible?

 

[basketcase]

Very simple.

Every regime that has confiscated privately owned firearms started with background checks and a "gun registry" ...

Very simply, more paranoid ramblings.

 

[fuji]

On one hand a system that prevents the majority of criminals and mentally unstable from getting guns. On the other, a suggestion that all you need is the buyer's word. Hmm. Which system seems more sensible?

What system prevents the majority of criminals from getting guns?

 

[fuji]

Very simple.

Every regime that has confiscated privately owned firearms started with background checks and a "gun registry"

Background checks are a liberal feel good measure, criminals will simply find other ways to obtain weapons. The only people who will submit to background checks are already law abiding citizens.

It is very clear that Obama favours firearm confiscation and bans. The only things that stand in his way are little things like the Constitution and political opposition.

It always amazes me that liberals will support policies that make them feel good about themselves even if they have no or the opposite effect in the real world.

Banning and confiscating firearms from law abiding citizens can only serve to increase criminal gun violence.

I'm not against background checks when they do not involve a registry. You can create a system where people can verify they have no criminal record and use that system for ANY purpose, not only purchasing firearms. Maybe you only want to rent to tenants who have no criminal background, maybe you are hiring a cashier who will handle money, or a maid who will go into homes to clean them, or a babysitter to look after your kids, or a coach for a kids sports team. All reasons to want to know somebody is clean. No need to tie it to firearms.

Then rewrite anyone selling a firearm to perform a background check. They can even get a confirmation receipt that they did so. Government does not need to know WHY the check was performed.

So this wouldn't create any registry and it would be generally useful in any case you need to know somebody had a clean history.

While it won't stop criminals from getting guns it would allow police to prosecute those who knowingly sold the gun to a crook and eliminate the plausible deniability is "he told me he was clean, I had no reason to suspect".

But the claim that this would stop the majority of criminals from getting guns? Nope.

 

[lucky_blue]

Very simply, more paranoid ramblings.

 

[lucky_blue]

2006 New Orleans gun confiscation

 

[SkyRider]

http://www.metronews.ca/news/toront...ce-will-soon-carry-less-lethal-sock-guns.html:thumb:

 

[cunning linguist]

Are you saying you actually check SPs' IDs for age and proof of immigration status?

So I take your lack of a response as a "no", you don't do the amount of due diligence that you expect of others? Not a surprise.

 

[basketcase]

What system prevents the majority of criminals from getting guns?

One that drastically limits straw purchases and unsupervised private sales. Past US studies have shown the vast majority of guns used in crimes came from a small number of gun dealers who the ATF is restricted from pursuing thanks to NRA lobbying of politicians.


But if background checks put even a small dent in criminals, mentally unstable, or people on watch lists getting guns then they're a good thing.

 

[basketcase]

Yep, I'm sure that the Holocaust wouldn't have happened if there wasn't gun control. Were German Jews were holding arsenals capable of even slowing down the Wehrmacht.

 

[basketcase]

So I take your lack of a response as a "no", you don't do the amount of due diligence that you expect of others? Not a surprise.

Yes, I avoided your complete failure of an analogy.

 

[cunning linguist]

Yes, I avoided your complete failure of an analogy.

So basically, there's no way to be certain that you yourself are not a criminal when engaging in your hobby; there's no accountability, oversight or transparency.

Hypocrisy much?

 

[basketcase]

So basically, there's no way to be certain that you yourself are not a criminal when engaging in your hobby; there's no accountability, oversight or transparency.

According to current Canadian law anyone purchasing sexual services is a criminal so your analogy is a farce.

 

[cunning linguist]

But if background checks put even a small dent in criminals, mentally unstable, or people on watch lists getting guns then they're a good thing.

If Blue Laws and C-36 put even a small dent in trafficking-in-persons, sex slavery, statutory rape and disease/infection transmission, then they're a good thing.

Am I doing it right?

 

[lucky_blue]

Yep, I'm sure that the Holocaust wouldn't have happened if there wasn't gun control. Were German Jews were holding arsenals capable of even slowing down the Wehrmacht.

Hitler had a lot of political enemies aside from Jews - they were all disarmed.

The point is - when the majority of law abiding freedom loving citizens are armed it becomes very much more difficult for a totalitarian government or ideology - like islamism to take over.

http://www.assassinationinfo.com/Attempted/Adolf_Hitler/timeline.htm