26 of the Dems who staged anti-gun sit-in are GUNOWNERS!!! HAHAHA

[daws101]

in theory ...

Oh!?

I just didn't walk in and walk out with a firearm.

close enough.

Close enough for what?

There was a background check. Every single time!

And there shouldn't be.

EVERY person in America who wants to own a firearm should have to undergo a very thorough background check performed by the FBI, including a physche eval.

If you pass that background check, you're free to buy and weapon you wish, all you have to do is present whatever form of ID is chosen to show you have had the background check.

Included in this system is a system where authorities can add flags and temporary halts on your right to own firearms if the need arises.

This way instead of the "everyone is guilty until they prove they are innocent" method the no fly list uses, your rights would not be affected unless authorities had good solid reason to do so, and you would know because you would have been arrested, or interviewed by LEOs or something, not some secretive list that you have no idea if you are on it or not.

If you get caught with a weapon and no background check, 10 years in prison per weapon on top of any other charges.

Done and done, IF people really wanted to enact sensible gun owner control.

I'm more inclined to think they prefer confiscation.

I'm already a firearm owner. How many times should I have to have a background check?

every time you buy a fire arm.
situations change and people change,

 

[Nosmo King]

I own a pump action 12 gauge shotgun.

But I don't own a weapon designed for a battlefield. I own a weapon designed for sport.

I want to keep the weapons used most commonly in mass shootings off the street, i.e. the semi automatic firing system and high capacity ammunition clips. Weapons used in drive by shootings, terrorist attacks, lunatics in school yards and movie theaters have no place on our streets.

And I own a gun.

I don't want to take away your guns. I just want to make sure that the most dangerous among us can't get one.

but it isn't what I think. So why do you supposed your think means more than mine?

My think?

My think looks at the problem of gun violence and considers solutions.

I'm speculating that your think ignores gun violence and focuses on fears of the feds raiding your house and confiscating your arsenal.

 

[jc456]

Nobody likes a hypocrite. This is as bad as dems ranting about financial inequality while First Tranny Michelle steals millions of dollars from the taxpayers for her vacations.

26 of the Democrats Who Participated in the Gun Control Sit-In Own Guns

By Jillian Kay Melchior | 2:13 pm, June 23, 2016
Congressional Democrats ended their 25-hour sit-in on the House floor this afternoon, failing to force a vote on two pieces of gun legislation. The controversial sit-in included 26 Democratic lawmakers who themselves own guns, Heat Street learned after examining 2013 USA Today data on congressional firearms ownership. The participants also included 12 more Democrats in Congress who either didn’t respond to USA Today’s gun survey or declined to say whether or not they possessed a firearm.

The sit-in, launched by civil-rights leader Rep. John Lewis, centered on two pieces of proposed gun legislation. One would expand background checks to cover all commercial gun sales; the other seeks tougher prohibitions against gun purchases for terror suspects.

Shows there are responsible gun owners out there who support reasonable regulations restricting terrorist access to guns

85% of Americans support it, Republicans won't even allow a vote

Republicans voted on it last week in the Senate.

4 bills failed to pass.

What gives the Democrat members of the House the idea that any bill voted on would pass, and if it did, it would pass in the Senate?

The key is VOTE for or against the bill and then let the voters decide

Right now, these bills get buried in committee and nobody is held accoutable

but they just did and it failed. So when they win back the majority, they can bring it up again. it isn't the first time it's failed either. So you are merely incorrect and not factually speaking.

 

[daws101]

close enough.

Close enough for what?

There was a background check. Every single time!

And there shouldn't be.

EVERY person in America who wants to own a firearm should have to undergo a very thorough background check performed by the FBI, including a physche eval.

If you pass that background check, you're free to buy and weapon you wish, all you have to do is present whatever form of ID is chosen to show you have had the background check.

Included in this system is a system where authorities can add flags and temporary halts on your right to own firearms if the need arises.

This way instead of the "everyone is guilty until they prove they are innocent" method the no fly list uses, your rights would not be affected unless authorities had good solid reason to do so, and you would know because you would have been arrested, or interviewed by LEOs or something, not some secretive list that you have no idea if you are on it or not.

If you get caught with a weapon and no background check, 10 years in prison per weapon on top of any other charges.

Done and done, IF people really wanted to enact sensible gun owner control.

I'm more inclined to think they prefer confiscation.

I'm already a firearm owner. How many times should I have to have a background check?

everytime. Why would they not? what if you used an already purchased gun and now your name is listed. No, as much of a gun lover as I am, background checks are needed for every purchase.

Retype that in English and I'll dispute it correctly.

I understood him perfectly .
there's that captain pretentious thing again.

 

[jc456]

Oh!?

I just didn't walk in and walk out with a firearm.

close enough.

Close enough for what?

There was a background check. Every single time!

And there shouldn't be.

EVERY person in America who wants to own a firearm should have to undergo a very thorough background check performed by the FBI, including a physche eval.

If you pass that background check, you're free to buy and weapon you wish, all you have to do is present whatever form of ID is chosen to show you have had the background check.

Included in this system is a system where authorities can add flags and temporary halts on your right to own firearms if the need arises.

This way instead of the "everyone is guilty until they prove they are innocent" method the no fly list uses, your rights would not be affected unless authorities had good solid reason to do so, and you would know because you would have been arrested, or interviewed by LEOs or something, not some secretive list that you have no idea if you are on it or not.

If you get caught with a weapon and no background check, 10 years in prison per weapon on top of any other charges.

Done and done, IF people really wanted to enact sensible gun owner control.

I'm more inclined to think they prefer confiscation.

I'm already a firearm owner. How many times should I have to have a background check?

every time you buy a fire arm.
situations change and people change,

yep, and it is that way. The dude in Orlando was denied purchase once.

 

[daws101]

I own a pump action 12 gauge shotgun.

But I don't own a weapon designed for a battlefield. I own a weapon designed for sport.

I want to keep the weapons used most commonly in mass shootings off the street, i.e. the semi automatic firing system and high capacity ammunition clips. Weapons used in drive by shootings, terrorist attacks, lunatics in school yards and movie theaters have no place on our streets.

And I own a gun.

I don't want to take away your guns. I just want to make sure that the most dangerous among us can't get one.

but it isn't what I think. So why do you supposed your think means more than mine?

My think?

My think looks at the problem of gun violence and considers solutions.

I'm speculating that your think ignores gun violence and focuses on fears of the feds raiding your house and confiscating your arsenal.

me thinks that too!

 

[OldLady]

We already have background checks.

in theory ...

Oh!?

I just didn't walk in and walk out with a firearm.

close enough.

Close enough for what?

There was a background check. Every single time!

And there shouldn't be.

EVERY person in America who wants to own a firearm should have to undergo a very thorough background check performed by the FBI, including a physche eval.

If you pass that background check, you're free to buy and weapon you wish, all you have to do is present whatever form of ID is chosen to show you have had the background check.

Included in this system is a system where authorities can add flags and temporary halts on your right to own firearms if the need arises.

This way instead of the "everyone is guilty until they prove they are innocent" method the no fly list uses, your rights would not be affected unless authorities had good solid reason to do so, and you would know because you would have been arrested, or interviewed by LEOs or something, not some secretive list that you have no idea if you are on it or not.

If you get caught with a weapon and no background check, 10 years in prison per weapon on top of any other charges.

Done and done, IF people really wanted to enact sensible gun owner control.

What makes you think the authorities don't already have a good solid reason for the people on the terror watch lists? Just because they don't share it with you? And what would constitute 'good solid reasons" for red flagging someone with a gun permit? The problem is, a 'suspected' terrorist by definition has not acted yet. Must they act in order to raise a flag? Too late. Except for that, actually, your suggestion is the best one I've heard so far as far as compromise goes. Therefore, I'm sure it would be immediately shot down.

 

[daws101]

close enough.

Close enough for what?

There was a background check. Every single time!

And there shouldn't be.

EVERY person in America who wants to own a firearm should have to undergo a very thorough background check performed by the FBI, including a physche eval.

If you pass that background check, you're free to buy and weapon you wish, all you have to do is present whatever form of ID is chosen to show you have had the background check.

Included in this system is a system where authorities can add flags and temporary halts on your right to own firearms if the need arises.

This way instead of the "everyone is guilty until they prove they are innocent" method the no fly list uses, your rights would not be affected unless authorities had good solid reason to do so, and you would know because you would have been arrested, or interviewed by LEOs or something, not some secretive list that you have no idea if you are on it or not.

If you get caught with a weapon and no background check, 10 years in prison per weapon on top of any other charges.

Done and done, IF people really wanted to enact sensible gun owner control.

I'm more inclined to think they prefer confiscation.

I'm already a firearm owner. How many times should I have to have a background check?

every time you buy a fire arm.
situations change and people change,

yep, and it is that way. The dude in Orlando was denied purchase once.

not enough it seems.

 

[Brain357]

O

Shows there are responsible gun owners out there who support reasonable regulations restricting terrorist access to guns

85% of Americans support it, Republicans won't even allow a vote

Republicans voted on it last week in the Senate.

4 bills failed to pass.

What gives the Democrat members of the House the idea that any bill voted on would pass, and if it did, it would pass in the Senate?

The key is VOTE for or against the bill and then let the voters decide

Right now, these bills get buried in committee and nobody is held accoutable

Remember when Reid allowed no votes? You loved it then didn't you hypocrite?

Reid allowed votes after Sandy Hook....Republicans blocked it

It was those kill Obamacare bills that never saw the light of day

Oh. OK. You admit Harry Reid is an obstructionist?

What was he obstructing? Even when the repubs control congress they do nothing.

 

[jc456]

Nobody likes a hypocrite. This is as bad as dems ranting about financial inequality while First Tranny Michelle steals millions of dollars from the taxpayers for her vacations.

Shows there are responsible gun owners out there who support reasonable regulations restricting terrorist access to guns

85% of Americans support it, Republicans won't even allow a vote

Republicans voted on it last week in the Senate.

4 bills failed to pass.

What gives the Democrat members of the House the idea that any bill voted on would pass, and if it did, it would pass in the Senate?

The key is VOTE for or against the bill and then let the voters decide

Right now, these bills get buried in committee and nobody is held accoutable

Remember when Reid allowed no votes? You loved it then didn't you hypocrite?

Reid allowed votes after Sandy Hook....Republicans blocked it

It was those kill Obamacare bills that never saw the light of day

it isn't what he's talking about, but that isn't unusual in here.

 

[jc456]

RELEASE: Gun Owners Overwhelmingly Support Background Checks, See NRA as Out of Touch, New Poll Finds

NRA believes in background checks, you're in error.

 

[Auld Phart]

in theory ...

Oh!?

I just didn't walk in and walk out with a firearm.

close enough.

Close enough for what?

There was a background check. Every single time!

And there shouldn't be.

EVERY person in America who wants to own a firearm should have to undergo a very thorough background check performed by the FBI, including a physche eval.

If you pass that background check, you're free to buy and weapon you wish, all you have to do is present whatever form of ID is chosen to show you have had the background check.

Included in this system is a system where authorities can add flags and temporary halts on your right to own firearms if the need arises.

This way instead of the "everyone is guilty until they prove they are innocent" method the no fly list uses, your rights would not be affected unless authorities had good solid reason to do so, and you would know because you would have been arrested, or interviewed by LEOs or something, not some secretive list that you have no idea if you are on it or not.

If you get caught with a weapon and no background check, 10 years in prison per weapon on top of any other charges.

Done and done, IF people really wanted to enact sensible gun owner control.

What makes you think the authorities don't already have a good solid reason for the people on the terror watch lists? Just because they don't share it with you? And what would constitute 'good solid reasons" for red flagging someone with a gun permit? The problem is, a 'suspected' terrorist by definition has not acted yet. Must they act in order to raise a flag? Too late. Except for that, actually, your suggestion is the best one I've heard so far as far as compromise goes. Therefore, I'm sure it would be immediately shot down.

The problem is a 'suspected' terrorist by definition has not acted yet

Yes, known 'suspected' terrorists like Cat Stevens, Teddy Kennedy, and hundreds of others.

 

[jc456]

Remember when Reid allowed no votes? You loved it then didn't you hypocrite?

Reid allowed votes after Sandy Hook....Republicans blocked it

It was those kill Obamacare bills that never saw the light of day

Why? Why not vote on kill Obamacare? Reid is a wormy shitass and you know it.

only in your meaningless opinion

My opinion means everything snot nose. Reid is a wormy shitassed democrat. Same as the rest of you mongrels.

another meaningless statement.

ditto

 

[Yousaidwhat]

O

Republicans voted on it last week in the Senate.

4 bills failed to pass.

What gives the Democrat members of the House the idea that any bill voted on would pass, and if it did, it would pass in the Senate?

The key is VOTE for or against the bill and then let the voters decide

Right now, these bills get buried in committee and nobody is held accoutable

Remember when Reid allowed no votes? You loved it then didn't you hypocrite?

Reid allowed votes after Sandy Hook....Republicans blocked it

It was those kill Obamacare bills that never saw the light of day

Oh. OK. You admit Harry Reid is an obstructionist?

What was he obstructing? Even when the repubs control congress they do nothing.

352 bills sat on his desk. 55 from Democrats. Some for up to 6 years.

I reject obstructionists from both parties.

 

[daws101]

when you buy a weapon and a back ground check is done do you receive and check list or summary of what was checked?

 

[daws101]

How to get a gun Without a Background Check

Obtaining a gun without a background check in the United States (and much of the world) is a fairly easy process, and is becoming easier all the time. Here are some of the common methods of obtaining a gun without a background check.

1. Have someone who can pass the background check buy it for you. This is illegal to do for someone who is forbidden from possessing guns. It is known as a straw purchase. The BATFE says that it is the most common method for criminals to obtain guns. In most states it is not illegal to buy a gun for someone who may legally possess one, as a gift.

2. Steal it. This is a common method for criminals to obtain guns. If you are of the persuasion that thinks more government is the answer to every problem, you might want to make it illegal for people to have their guns stolen, or to require that guns be locked up in vaults, making them harder to steal.

The Supreme Court has already ruled that it is unconstitutional to require people to have their guns locked up. People have a right to have loaded handguns (the type most commonly used in crime) unlocked in their home as ruled in the Heller decision. This ruling was extended to the states in McDonald. The Newtown shooter stole the guns he used, and murdered his mother in order to do so.

3. Buy it from someone who stole it. Another very common source for criminals. Stealing immediately breaks the ability to "trace" the firearm, rendering "tracing" nearly useless for solving crimes. It can be used for demonizing the original victim the gun was stolen from, though. Guns that are used in crime in tight gun control states, that come from states that have greater freedom in obtaining guns (often with lower crime rates), were purchased an average of 11 years before. With over 300 million firearms in the United States, methods two and three are a large and uncontrollable source of guns for criminals. Tens of millions of these guns were made before 1968, have no serial number, and cannot be traced.
How to get a gun Without a Background Check

 

[Yousaidwhat]

RELEASE: Gun Owners Overwhelmingly Support Background Checks, See NRA as Out of Touch, New Poll Finds

NRA believes in background checks, you're in error.

You would think they knew this by now.

 

[daws101]

O

The key is VOTE for or against the bill and then let the voters decide

Right now, these bills get buried in committee and nobody is held accoutable

Remember when Reid allowed no votes? You loved it then didn't you hypocrite?

Reid allowed votes after Sandy Hook....Republicans blocked it

It was those kill Obamacare bills that never saw the light of day

Oh. OK. You admit Harry Reid is an obstructionist?

What was he obstructing? Even when the repubs control congress they do nothing.

352 bills sat on his desk. 55 from Democrats. Some for up to 6 years.

I reject obstructionists from both parties.

so you see no other reason for why that happened ?

 

[jc456]

RELEASE: Gun Owners Overwhelmingly Support Background Checks, See NRA as Out of Touch, New Poll Finds

who gives a shit? Americans are also overwhelmingly stupid and we're a representative democracy, not a direct democracy.

NRA has bought the loyalty of the GOP

Can't get any more American than that

again, you should educate yourself on background checks. The NRA agrees with them, doesn't oppose the law. wow, just keep posting useless drivel.

 

[jc456]

RELEASE: Gun Owners Overwhelmingly Support Background Checks, See NRA as Out of Touch, New Poll Finds

NRA believes in background checks, you're in error.

You would think they knew this by now.

well obviously they don't, reading in this thread, or those folks doing the sit in. i don't know, uneducated in congress.

Also, i wish these stups would learn what happens with a no fly list. I laugh at them all. go read up stups.