Why anti gun people are so angry.....

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

No, you're wrong on that point. Background checks for individual sales are easy without any sort of registration.
It's simple. If I sell you a gun without a background check and you never commit a crime with that gun, it's no problem, and no one would ever even know.
But if I sell you that gun, and you DO commit a crime with it, you get charged with a further crime if you can't tell the police where you got the gun....

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that I got the gun from you after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

and if you tell them from me, and when they come and ask I can't prove that I ran a background check on you, then I get charged with a crime.

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that you actually sold the gun after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

As long as the purchaser never commits a crime, the state neither knows, nor cares...

The state does not care if someone breaks criminal law so long as he doesn't break another law after that?

^ Prime example of a one issue moron who is unwilling to compromise at all.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Registration would not infringe, so your dumb ass probably should be willing to make some concessions that would negate the need to require registration.

Registration is the first step in a ban or in confiscation of categories of guns....ask New York, and California and the other places that have used registration as a means of getting guns out of the hands of citizens....

Possibly correct, which is why I favor gun owners themselves saying "you know we need to do the responsible thing" and implementing a system to do background checks in the manner I suggested above.

Look, I really believe the gays are just burning bridges left and right because they don't want to compromise, they want to FORCE everyone to accept them, like them, do business with them, etc etc and we are really seeing a backlash against that type of mentality, people are just getting sick of people who want everything THEIR way with no room for compromise.

I don't like seeing gun owners go down the same path. You and I both know that going down to your local gunshop and paying them a few bucks to do a background check on a private gun sale would do ZERO harm to anyone. While at the same time making millions of Americans breathe a little easier, and yes possibly even keep a few undesirables from buying guns. Its the responsible thing to do.

That being said, I think that in a day and time when you get online and get a credit card with a $10K credit limit in 60 seconds, a 7 day waiting period is ridiculous.

 

[2aguy]

No, you're wrong on that point. Background checks for individual sales are easy without any sort of registration.
It's simple. If I sell you a gun without a background check and you never commit a crime with that gun, it's no problem, and no one would ever even know.
But if I sell you that gun, and you DO commit a crime with it, you get charged with a further crime if you can't tell the police where you got the gun....

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that I got the gun from you after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

and if you tell them from me, and when they come and ask I can't prove that I ran a background check on you, then I get charged with a crime.

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that you actually sold the gun after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

As long as the purchaser never commits a crime, the state neither knows, nor cares...

The state does not care if someone breaks criminal law so long as he doesn't break another law after that?

^ Prime example of a one issue moron who is unwilling to compromise at all.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Registration would not infringe, so your dumb ass probably should be willing to make some concessions that would negate the need to require registration.

We have already made all the concessions necessary to stop felons with guns.....everything from this point forward is gun control by incremental laws......we give them Universal background checks....and they still break the law by stealing guns and having people who can buy guns with a background check sell or give them that gun....so now they come back and say...oh yeah.....they are still getting illegal guns we need the next, really really, super duper background check law that this time, we promise, is all we want......you know.....to stop illegal gun sales......

We have been here before......

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

sorry....doesn't cut it.....they get background checks in private,sales, notice how they lie even in this explanation...they say they will now require background checks at gun shows and Internet sales....when those already exist........you can't buy a gun from a licensed gun deaLer at a gun show without one.....and if you get a gun over the Internet you have to have it delivered to a licensed gun dealer to accept it....already...that they use gun grabber distortion a in this explanation does not lend itself to trust.....

also....most criminal guns do not come from gun shows in the first place...they already use family members who can pass background checks to get guns or they steal them...again, already by passing current background checks and any future bbackground checks....thus creating a solution that won't stop the crime they say they want to stop.....

again...not leading to trust of their motives....

and of course we don't know the "intended" unintended consequences of what they are proposing that won't come out till they pass the legislation...

again...not our first rodeo with gun grabbers......

You are the one dealing in deception and lies..YES, background checks at gun shows are required for LICENSED dealers. Background checks are NOT required at guns shows for people who pose as "private dealers". The intent of the law was to allow mom and pop to have a table at a gun show to sell their "private" collection. Dealers posing as "private" sellers are moving large volumes of guns without background checks.

These so-called private sellers are supposed to be making only occasional sales. According to federal law, they cannot be "engaged in the business" of selling firearms. But that's exactly what an undercover investigation found. They found private sellers with large inventories doing a brisk business. In fact, one private seller acknowledged selling 348 guns in less than a year.

AND...
investigators told the private sellers that they "probably couldn't pass a background check" -- and at that point, the seller should have sent them away. Because even private sellers are prohibited by federal law from selling to those who they have reason to suspect could not pass a background check.

Instead, 19 out of 30 private sellers made the sale.

Dealers posing as "private" sellers are moving large volumes of guns without background checks.

And if they sell to a felon, who already knows it is against the law to own a gun, they are breaking current law.......especially since they can already get background checks done.........

investigators told the private sellers that they "probably couldn't pass a background check" -- and at that point, the seller should have sent them away. Because even private sellers are prohibited by federal law from selling to those who they have reason to suspect could not pass a background check.

Thanks for proving my point.....they are already breaking the law...already breaking the law...get it...your own quote shows this is true....it is already breaking the law with current background checks.......and nothing in a Universal Background Check law would stop it either.......nothing...at....all......

These so-called private sellers are supposed to be making only occasional sales. According to federal law, they cannot be "engaged in the business" of selling firearms. But that's exactly what an undercover investigation found.

again....thanks for proving my point for me.......they are already breaking the law and not using background checks we currently have and just making a "Super Dooper" universal background check law will not stop it because what they do now to bypass currrent background checks will still be done for "SUPER DOOPER" universal background checks.....

If they are breaking federal law.....fucking arrest them now...you don't need a fucking new "SUPER DOOPER" universal background check to arrest these people right fucking now...............

But you don't want to arrest them.....you want to arrest the law abiding gun owners, the people you can actually stop buying guns....since criminals will just ignore your asses and buy their guns anyway....

Are you a liar or obtuse? Under current laws, private sellers are NOT required to run a background check at gun shows. But dealers POSING as private sellers are circumventing the law.

The Manchin-Toomey gun proposal would close the gun show loophole.

But it doesn't stop criminals from obtaining weapons. The biggest problems lie within the inner city communities where gangs are seemingly allowed to run rampant. That is where the biggest homicide rates stem from, and those people do not go through legal means to obtain weapons anyways.

However, I don't think I would be opposed to such a background check. If I was a seller of a weapon, and I happened to sell one to a dangerous person who then used it to commit a murder, I would probably feel much guilt about that. So I would not be opposed to closing that loophole. However, DO NOT expect that it will affect homicide rates in any way. That would be more just protection for the seller.

As a responsible seller you can...right now...tell the buyer that before you sell the gun both you and he have to go to a local gun store or police station and run his background.....no universal background law required.......

If you are not a responsible seller, and think a 600 dollar gun sale is worth several years of federal prison time....you would sell the gun to the guy who says he can't pass a background check anyway.....right now.....with the current system that states that felons can't buy guns........

True, but that is ONLY if the guy tells you he couldn't pass a background check. Most people wouldn't volunteer that information.

If you sell it to him and you can convince a DA that you didn't know he wouldn't pass a background check, you have no problems.

 

[2aguy]

No, you're wrong on that point. Background checks for individual sales are easy without any sort of registration.
It's simple. If I sell you a gun without a background check and you never commit a crime with that gun, it's no problem, and no one would ever even know.
But if I sell you that gun, and you DO commit a crime with it, you get charged with a further crime if you can't tell the police where you got the gun....

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that I got the gun from you after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

and if you tell them from me, and when they come and ask I can't prove that I ran a background check on you, then I get charged with a crime.

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that you actually sold the gun after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

As long as the purchaser never commits a crime, the state neither knows, nor cares...

The state does not care if someone breaks criminal law so long as he doesn't break another law after that?

^ Prime example of a one issue moron who is unwilling to compromise at all.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Registration would not infringe, so your dumb ass probably should be willing to make some concessions that would negate the need to require registration.

Registration is the first step in a ban or in confiscation of categories of guns....ask New York, and California and the other places that have used registration as a means of getting guns out of the hands of citizens....

Possibly correct, which is why I favor gun owners themselves saying "you know we need to do the responsible thing" and implementing a system to do background checks in the manner I suggested above.

Look, I really believe the gays are just burning bridges left and right because they don't want to compromise, they want to FORCE everyone to accept them, like them, do business with them, etc etc and we are really seeing a backlash against that type of mentality, people are just getting sick of people who want everything THEIR way with no room for compromise.

I don't like seeing gun owners go down the same path. You and I both know that going down to your local gunshop and paying them a few bucks to do a background check on a private gun sale would do ZERO harm to anyone. While at the same time making millions of Americans breathe a little easier, and yes possibly even keep a few undesirables from buying guns. Its the responsible thing to do.

That being said, I think that in a day and time when you get online and get a credit card with a $10K credit limit in 60 seconds, a 7 day waiting period is ridiculous.

If I sell a gun to a stranger I am already going to do that.....the guy with no ethics is already breaking current background check laws by selling to people he doesn't know are felons....so your reasonableness is pointless and is granting the anti gunners something they don't need....

So no........

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

No, you're wrong on that point. Background checks for individual sales are easy without any sort of registration.
It's simple. If I sell you a gun without a background check and you never commit a crime with that gun, it's no problem, and no one would ever even know.
But if I sell you that gun, and you DO commit a crime with it, you get charged with a further crime if you can't tell the police where you got the gun....

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that I got the gun from you after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

and if you tell them from me, and when they come and ask I can't prove that I ran a background check on you, then I get charged with a crime.

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that you actually sold the gun after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

As long as the purchaser never commits a crime, the state neither knows, nor cares...

The state does not care if someone breaks criminal law so long as he doesn't break another law after that?

^ Prime example of a one issue moron who is unwilling to compromise at all.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Registration would not infringe, so your dumb ass probably should be willing to make some concessions that would negate the need to require registration.

We have already made all the concessions necessary to stop felons with guns.....everything from this point forward is gun control by incremental laws......we give them Universal background checks....and they still break the law by stealing guns and having people who can buy guns with a background check sell or give them that gun....so now they come back and say...oh yeah.....they are still getting illegal guns we need the next, really really, super duper background check law that this time, we promise, is all we want......you know.....to stop illegal gun sales......

We have been here before......

You HAVE TO acknowledge that the internet changes everything. People ARE buying and selling guns from and to complete strangers that they know nothing about , other than they want to buy/sell a gun. Those sales should require a background check

 

[2aguy]

You are the one dealing in deception and lies..YES, background checks at gun shows are required for LICENSED dealers. Background checks are NOT required at guns shows for people who pose as "private dealers". The intent of the law was to allow mom and pop to have a table at a gun show to sell their "private" collection. Dealers posing as "private" sellers are moving large volumes of guns without background checks.

These so-called private sellers are supposed to be making only occasional sales. According to federal law, they cannot be "engaged in the business" of selling firearms. But that's exactly what an undercover investigation found. They found private sellers with large inventories doing a brisk business. In fact, one private seller acknowledged selling 348 guns in less than a year.

AND...
investigators told the private sellers that they "probably couldn't pass a background check" -- and at that point, the seller should have sent them away. Because even private sellers are prohibited by federal law from selling to those who they have reason to suspect could not pass a background check.

Instead, 19 out of 30 private sellers made the sale.

Dealers posing as "private" sellers are moving large volumes of guns without background checks.

And if they sell to a felon, who already knows it is against the law to own a gun, they are breaking current law.......especially since they can already get background checks done.........

investigators told the private sellers that they "probably couldn't pass a background check" -- and at that point, the seller should have sent them away. Because even private sellers are prohibited by federal law from selling to those who they have reason to suspect could not pass a background check.

Thanks for proving my point.....they are already breaking the law...already breaking the law...get it...your own quote shows this is true....it is already breaking the law with current background checks.......and nothing in a Universal Background Check law would stop it either.......nothing...at....all......

These so-called private sellers are supposed to be making only occasional sales. According to federal law, they cannot be "engaged in the business" of selling firearms. But that's exactly what an undercover investigation found.

again....thanks for proving my point for me.......they are already breaking the law and not using background checks we currently have and just making a "Super Dooper" universal background check law will not stop it because what they do now to bypass currrent background checks will still be done for "SUPER DOOPER" universal background checks.....

If they are breaking federal law.....fucking arrest them now...you don't need a fucking new "SUPER DOOPER" universal background check to arrest these people right fucking now...............

But you don't want to arrest them.....you want to arrest the law abiding gun owners, the people you can actually stop buying guns....since criminals will just ignore your asses and buy their guns anyway....

Are you a liar or obtuse? Under current laws, private sellers are NOT required to run a background check at gun shows. But dealers POSING as private sellers are circumventing the law.

The Manchin-Toomey gun proposal would close the gun show loophole.

But it doesn't stop criminals from obtaining weapons. The biggest problems lie within the inner city communities where gangs are seemingly allowed to run rampant. That is where the biggest homicide rates stem from, and those people do not go through legal means to obtain weapons anyways.

However, I don't think I would be opposed to such a background check. If I was a seller of a weapon, and I happened to sell one to a dangerous person who then used it to commit a murder, I would probably feel much guilt about that. So I would not be opposed to closing that loophole. However, DO NOT expect that it will affect homicide rates in any way. That would be more just protection for the seller.

As a responsible seller you can...right now...tell the buyer that before you sell the gun both you and he have to go to a local gun store or police station and run his background.....no universal background law required.......

If you are not a responsible seller, and think a 600 dollar gun sale is worth several years of federal prison time....you would sell the gun to the guy who says he can't pass a background check anyway.....right now.....with the current system that states that felons can't buy guns........

True, but that is ONLY if the guy tells you he couldn't pass a background check. Most people wouldn't volunteer that information.

If you sell it to him and you can convince a DA that you didn't know he wouldn't pass a background check, you have no problems.

Any seller today will ask if he can own a gun since selling to him and not knowing will bring in the feds regardless if you knew or not...they will turn your life upside down until you prove you didn't know....they will give you an anal exam...they will try their best to put you in jail....and you will spend thousands of dollars on legal fees if they try to prove you knew....

So again, no...there is no need for super duper background checks.......

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

No, you're wrong on that point. Background checks for individual sales are easy without any sort of registration.
It's simple. If I sell you a gun without a background check and you never commit a crime with that gun, it's no problem, and no one would ever even know.
But if I sell you that gun, and you DO commit a crime with it, you get charged with a further crime if you can't tell the police where you got the gun....

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that I got the gun from you after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

and if you tell them from me, and when they come and ask I can't prove that I ran a background check on you, then I get charged with a crime.

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that you actually sold the gun after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

As long as the purchaser never commits a crime, the state neither knows, nor cares...

The state does not care if someone breaks criminal law so long as he doesn't break another law after that?

^ Prime example of a one issue moron who is unwilling to compromise at all.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Registration would not infringe, so your dumb ass probably should be willing to make some concessions that would negate the need to require registration.

Registration is the first step in a ban or in confiscation of categories of guns....ask New York, and California and the other places that have used registration as a means of getting guns out of the hands of citizens....

Possibly correct, which is why I favor gun owners themselves saying "you know we need to do the responsible thing" and implementing a system to do background checks in the manner I suggested above.

Look, I really believe the gays are just burning bridges left and right because they don't want to compromise, they want to FORCE everyone to accept them, like them, do business with them, etc etc and we are really seeing a backlash against that type of mentality, people are just getting sick of people who want everything THEIR way with no room for compromise.

I don't like seeing gun owners go down the same path. You and I both know that going down to your local gunshop and paying them a few bucks to do a background check on a private gun sale would do ZERO harm to anyone. While at the same time making millions of Americans breathe a little easier, and yes possibly even keep a few undesirables from buying guns. Its the responsible thing to do.

That being said, I think that in a day and time when you get online and get a credit card with a $10K credit limit in 60 seconds, a 7 day waiting period is ridiculous.

If I sell a gun to a stranger I am already going to do that.....the guy with no ethics is already breaking current background check laws by selling to people he doesn't know are felons....so your reasonableness is pointless and is granting the anti gunners something they don't need....

So no........

do what?

 

[2aguy]

No, you're wrong on that point. Background checks for individual sales are easy without any sort of registration.
It's simple. If I sell you a gun without a background check and you never commit a crime with that gun, it's no problem, and no one would ever even know.
But if I sell you that gun, and you DO commit a crime with it, you get charged with a further crime if you can't tell the police where you got the gun....

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that I got the gun from you after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

and if you tell them from me, and when they come and ask I can't prove that I ran a background check on you, then I get charged with a crime.

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that you actually sold the gun after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

As long as the purchaser never commits a crime, the state neither knows, nor cares...

The state does not care if someone breaks criminal law so long as he doesn't break another law after that?

^ Prime example of a one issue moron who is unwilling to compromise at all.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Registration would not infringe, so your dumb ass probably should be willing to make some concessions that would negate the need to require registration.

We have already made all the concessions necessary to stop felons with guns.....everything from this point forward is gun control by incremental laws......we give them Universal background checks....and they still break the law by stealing guns and having people who can buy guns with a background check sell or give them that gun....so now they come back and say...oh yeah.....they are still getting illegal guns we need the next, really really, super duper background check law that this time, we promise, is all we want......you know.....to stop illegal gun sales......

We have been here before......

You HAVE TO acknowledge that the internet changes everything. People ARE buying and selling guns from and to complete strangers that they know nothing about , other than they want to buy/sell a gun. Those sales should require a background check

and in order to pick up that gun it must be delivered to a gun store...where they have to...right now...today....do background checks......they have to do a background check to sell that gun.........even on the internet.......

If you don't send it to a gun store...you are right now breaking the law............so if you sell to someone without going to a gun dealer you can be arrested...right now......without super duper background checks.......

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

And if they sell to a felon, who already knows it is against the law to own a gun, they are breaking current law.......especially since they can already get background checks done.........

Thanks for proving my point.....they are already breaking the law...already breaking the law...get it...your own quote shows this is true....it is already breaking the law with current background checks.......and nothing in a Universal Background Check law would stop it either.......nothing...at....all......

again....thanks for proving my point for me.......they are already breaking the law and not using background checks we currently have and just making a "Super Dooper" universal background check law will not stop it because what they do now to bypass currrent background checks will still be done for "SUPER DOOPER" universal background checks.....

If they are breaking federal law.....fucking arrest them now...you don't need a fucking new "SUPER DOOPER" universal background check to arrest these people right fucking now...............

But you don't want to arrest them.....you want to arrest the law abiding gun owners, the people you can actually stop buying guns....since criminals will just ignore your asses and buy their guns anyway....

Are you a liar or obtuse? Under current laws, private sellers are NOT required to run a background check at gun shows. But dealers POSING as private sellers are circumventing the law.

The Manchin-Toomey gun proposal would close the gun show loophole.

But it doesn't stop criminals from obtaining weapons. The biggest problems lie within the inner city communities where gangs are seemingly allowed to run rampant. That is where the biggest homicide rates stem from, and those people do not go through legal means to obtain weapons anyways.

However, I don't think I would be opposed to such a background check. If I was a seller of a weapon, and I happened to sell one to a dangerous person who then used it to commit a murder, I would probably feel much guilt about that. So I would not be opposed to closing that loophole. However, DO NOT expect that it will affect homicide rates in any way. That would be more just protection for the seller.

As a responsible seller you can...right now...tell the buyer that before you sell the gun both you and he have to go to a local gun store or police station and run his background.....no universal background law required.......

If you are not a responsible seller, and think a 600 dollar gun sale is worth several years of federal prison time....you would sell the gun to the guy who says he can't pass a background check anyway.....right now.....with the current system that states that felons can't buy guns........

True, but that is ONLY if the guy tells you he couldn't pass a background check. Most people wouldn't volunteer that information.

If you sell it to him and you can convince a DA that you didn't know he wouldn't pass a background check, you have no problems.

Any seller today will ask if he can own a gun since selling to him and not knowing will bring in the feds regardless if you knew or not...they will turn your life upside down until you prove you didn't know....they will give you an anal exam...they will try their best to put you in jail....and you will spend thousands of dollars on legal fees if they try to prove you knew....

So again, no...there is no need for super duper background checks.......

This is very true, so you would think it would be in the seller's best interest to have that piece of paper that says "passed background check"

I'm a bit confused on your stance here, you claim that responsible gun owners will do the background checks anyway, so there is no need for a law that requires it.

Responsible drinkers don't drink and drive, and yet we have laws against drinking and driving, etc etc.

 

[2aguy]

Set up internet stings....sell guns to people who won't go to a gun dealer...when they come to get the gun...arrest them.......

Set up internet stings....say you want to buy a gun...if they won't send the gun to a real gun dealer to pick it up and get a background check, when they show up....arrest them...

Done and done....

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

No, you're wrong on that point. Background checks for individual sales are easy without any sort of registration.
It's simple. If I sell you a gun without a background check and you never commit a crime with that gun, it's no problem, and no one would ever even know.
But if I sell you that gun, and you DO commit a crime with it, you get charged with a further crime if you can't tell the police where you got the gun....

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that I got the gun from you after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

and if you tell them from me, and when they come and ask I can't prove that I ran a background check on you, then I get charged with a crime.

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that you actually sold the gun after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

As long as the purchaser never commits a crime, the state neither knows, nor cares...

The state does not care if someone breaks criminal law so long as he doesn't break another law after that?

^ Prime example of a one issue moron who is unwilling to compromise at all.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Registration would not infringe, so your dumb ass probably should be willing to make some concessions that would negate the need to require registration.

We have already made all the concessions necessary to stop felons with guns.....everything from this point forward is gun control by incremental laws......we give them Universal background checks....and they still break the law by stealing guns and having people who can buy guns with a background check sell or give them that gun....so now they come back and say...oh yeah.....they are still getting illegal guns we need the next, really really, super duper background check law that this time, we promise, is all we want......you know.....to stop illegal gun sales......

We have been here before......

You HAVE TO acknowledge that the internet changes everything. People ARE buying and selling guns from and to complete strangers that they know nothing about , other than they want to buy/sell a gun. Those sales should require a background check

and in order to pick up that gun it must be delivered to a gun store...where they have to...right now...today....do background checks......they have to do a background check to sell that gun.........even on the internet.......

If you don't send it to a gun store...you are right now breaking the law............so if you sell to someone without going to a gun dealer you can be arrested...right now......without super duper background checks.......

Untrue man. Do you have Facebook? I can go to a local yardsale site right now and agree to buy an AR15 from a guy who lives less than 10 miles from me. Do you think that guy is going to demand I meet him anywhere? Of course not. He just wants money, and there are many many sellers like him out there all over the country.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Set up internet stings....sell guns to people who won't go to a gun dealer...when they come to get the gun...arrest them.......

Set up internet stings....say you want to buy a gun...if they won't send the gun to a real gun dealer to pick it up and get a background check, when they show up....arrest them...

Done and done....

Arrest them for what? There is no current law requiring them to perform the background check, that is what you are not understanding. I have lots of guns. I could list them on Craigslist or whatever and sell them, and there is no current law requiring a background check

 

[2aguy]

Are you a liar or obtuse? Under current laws, private sellers are NOT required to run a background check at gun shows. But dealers POSING as private sellers are circumventing the law.

The Manchin-Toomey gun proposal would close the gun show loophole.

But it doesn't stop criminals from obtaining weapons. The biggest problems lie within the inner city communities where gangs are seemingly allowed to run rampant. That is where the biggest homicide rates stem from, and those people do not go through legal means to obtain weapons anyways.

However, I don't think I would be opposed to such a background check. If I was a seller of a weapon, and I happened to sell one to a dangerous person who then used it to commit a murder, I would probably feel much guilt about that. So I would not be opposed to closing that loophole. However, DO NOT expect that it will affect homicide rates in any way. That would be more just protection for the seller.

As a responsible seller you can...right now...tell the buyer that before you sell the gun both you and he have to go to a local gun store or police station and run his background.....no universal background law required.......

If you are not a responsible seller, and think a 600 dollar gun sale is worth several years of federal prison time....you would sell the gun to the guy who says he can't pass a background check anyway.....right now.....with the current system that states that felons can't buy guns........

True, but that is ONLY if the guy tells you he couldn't pass a background check. Most people wouldn't volunteer that information.

If you sell it to him and you can convince a DA that you didn't know he wouldn't pass a background check, you have no problems.

Any seller today will ask if he can own a gun since selling to him and not knowing will bring in the feds regardless if you knew or not...they will turn your life upside down until you prove you didn't know....they will give you an anal exam...they will try their best to put you in jail....and you will spend thousands of dollars on legal fees if they try to prove you knew....

So again, no...there is no need for super duper background checks.......

This is very true, so you would think it would be in the seller's best interest to have that piece of paper that says "passed background check"

I'm a bit confused on your stance here, you claim that responsible gun owners will do the background checks anyway, so there is no need for a law that requires it.

Responsible drinkers don't drink and drive, and yet we have laws against drinking and driving, etc etc.

But we don't have bars running background checks on their customers before they drink...do we...and that isn't a right.....you are arrested when you are caught breaking existing law....we do not have the bar run a criminal check for DUIs do we..........now that I have said that I regret it.....too many people will want to do that now as well......

This is very true, so you would think it would be in the seller's best interest to have that piece of paper that says "passed background check"

For their own safety, yes......but again...they can do that now...without super duper background checks........

 

[M14 Shooter]

No, you're wrong on that point. Background checks for individual sales are easy without any sort of registration.
It's simple. If I sell you a gun without a background check and you never commit a crime with that gun, it's no problem, and no one would ever even know.
But if I sell you that gun, and you DO commit a crime with it, you get charged with a further crime if you can't tell the police where you got the gun....

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that I got the gun from you after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

and if you tell them from me, and when they come and ask I can't prove that I ran a background check on you, then I get charged with a crime.

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that you actually sold the gun after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

As long as the purchaser never commits a crime, the state neither knows, nor cares...

The state does not care if someone breaks criminal law so long as he doesn't break another law after that?

^ Prime example of a one issue moron who is unwilling to compromise at all.

^
Prime example of someone who knows he cannot answer the questions put to him regarding his position and so runs away from same.

 

[2aguy]

Set up internet stings....sell guns to people who won't go to a gun dealer...when they come to get the gun...arrest them.......

Set up internet stings....say you want to buy a gun...if they won't send the gun to a real gun dealer to pick it up and get a background check, when they show up....arrest them...

Done and done....

Arrest them for what? There is no current law requiring them to perform the background check, that is what you are not understanding. I have lots of guns. I could list them on Craigslist or whatever and sell them, and there is no current law requiring a background check

You have to send them to a gun store to transfer them....then before they release those guns they must do a background check...right now......

If you sell those guns on Craigslist......and don't do that...you can be arrested...right now.......and then you have to prove you aren't a straw seller of guns....and you don't need to have super duper universal background checks......

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

But it doesn't stop criminals from obtaining weapons. The biggest problems lie within the inner city communities where gangs are seemingly allowed to run rampant. That is where the biggest homicide rates stem from, and those people do not go through legal means to obtain weapons anyways.

However, I don't think I would be opposed to such a background check. If I was a seller of a weapon, and I happened to sell one to a dangerous person who then used it to commit a murder, I would probably feel much guilt about that. So I would not be opposed to closing that loophole. However, DO NOT expect that it will affect homicide rates in any way. That would be more just protection for the seller.

As a responsible seller you can...right now...tell the buyer that before you sell the gun both you and he have to go to a local gun store or police station and run his background.....no universal background law required.......

If you are not a responsible seller, and think a 600 dollar gun sale is worth several years of federal prison time....you would sell the gun to the guy who says he can't pass a background check anyway.....right now.....with the current system that states that felons can't buy guns........

True, but that is ONLY if the guy tells you he couldn't pass a background check. Most people wouldn't volunteer that information.

If you sell it to him and you can convince a DA that you didn't know he wouldn't pass a background check, you have no problems.

Any seller today will ask if he can own a gun since selling to him and not knowing will bring in the feds regardless if you knew or not...they will turn your life upside down until you prove you didn't know....they will give you an anal exam...they will try their best to put you in jail....and you will spend thousands of dollars on legal fees if they try to prove you knew....

So again, no...there is no need for super duper background checks.......

This is very true, so you would think it would be in the seller's best interest to have that piece of paper that says "passed background check"

I'm a bit confused on your stance here, you claim that responsible gun owners will do the background checks anyway, so there is no need for a law that requires it.

Responsible drinkers don't drink and drive, and yet we have laws against drinking and driving, etc etc.

But we don't have bars running background checks on their customers before they drink...do we...and that isn't a right.....you are arrested when you are caught breaking existing law....we do not have the bar run a criminal check for DUIs do we..........now that I have said that I regret it.....too many people will want to do that now as well......

This is very true, so you would think it would be in the seller's best interest to have that piece of paper that says "passed background check"

For their own safety, yes......but again...they can do that now...without super duper background checks........

Correct, they CAN do it, I prefer a law that says the MUST do it. You have agreed that responsible gun owners will do it eithe rway, so I must ask, what the fuck are you arguing about here? THe right to be an irresponsible gun owner?

 

[M14 Shooter]

No, you're wrong on that point. Background checks for individual sales are easy without any sort of registration.
It's simple. If I sell you a gun without a background check and you never commit a crime with that gun, it's no problem, and no one would ever even know.
But if I sell you that gun, and you DO commit a crime with it, you get charged with a further crime if you can't tell the police where you got the gun....

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that I got the gun from you after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

and if you tell them from me, and when they come and ask I can't prove that I ran a background check on you, then I get charged with a crime.

Only if the DA thinks he can prove that you actually sold the gun after the background check was necessary, absent said check.
How does he do that?

As long as the purchaser never commits a crime, the state neither knows, nor cares...

The state does not care if someone breaks criminal law so long as he doesn't break another law after that?

^ Prime example of a one issue moron who is unwilling to compromise at all.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Registration would not infringe, so your dumb ass probably should be willing to make some concessions that would negate the need to require registration.

We have already made all the concessions necessary to stop felons with guns....

By definition it is impossible to compromise with the anti-gun loons because they have nothing to give us in return for us giving away part of our rights.

 

[2aguy]

Set up internet stings....sell guns to people who won't go to a gun dealer...when they come to get the gun...arrest them.......

Set up internet stings....say you want to buy a gun...if they won't send the gun to a real gun dealer to pick it up and get a background check, when they show up....arrest them...

Done and done....

Arrest them for what? There is no current law requiring them to perform the background check, that is what you are not understanding. I have lots of guns. I could list them on Craigslist or whatever and sell them, and there is no current law requiring a background check

This is what you arrest them for......you send in your undercover cop and ask to buy a gun and you tell them, openly...I can't pass a background check...I have an old felony conviction....if they say I don't care let's do this anyway...you arrest them since they now know you are a felon.......

You set up an undercover table at a gun show and ask each customer trying to buy a gun to go through a background check...if they say they can't pass the check you say...hey...let's do this anyway..and if they buy the gun anyway...you fucking arrest them since they know they can't own the gun and have just broken the law.......

no universal background check needed.....

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Set up internet stings....sell guns to people who won't go to a gun dealer...when they come to get the gun...arrest them.......

Set up internet stings....say you want to buy a gun...if they won't send the gun to a real gun dealer to pick it up and get a background check, when they show up....arrest them...

Done and done....

Arrest them for what? There is no current law requiring them to perform the background check, that is what you are not understanding. I have lots of guns. I could list them on Craigslist or whatever and sell them, and there is no current law requiring a background check

You have to send them to a gun store to transfer them....then before they release those guns they must do a background check...right now......

If you sell those guns on Craigslist......and don't do that...you can be arrested...right now.......and then you have to prove you aren't a straw seller of guns....and you don't need to have super duper universal background checks......

No you can not be. Quote the law man.

The current law states that you must ASK the person if they could pass a background check. How many people do you think even do that? Then of the ones who do ask, how many buyers who couldn't do you really think are going to say "no man I couldn't pass a background check?"

If you ask, and the person lies to you, you are off the hook. Worse, it would be virtually impossible to prove you lied if you said you asked when you hadn't.

You're being dishonest here. You know there are a lot of sale going on where no one is asked about background checks , and that proving no one was asked would be virtually impossible.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Set up internet stings....sell guns to people who won't go to a gun dealer...when they come to get the gun...arrest them.......

Set up internet stings....say you want to buy a gun...if they won't send the gun to a real gun dealer to pick it up and get a background check, when they show up....arrest them...

Done and done....

Arrest them for what? There is no current law requiring them to perform the background check, that is what you are not understanding. I have lots of guns. I could list them on Craigslist or whatever and sell them, and there is no current law requiring a background check

This is what you arrest them for......you send in your undercover cop and ask to buy a gun and you tell them, openly...I can't pass a background check...I have an old felony conviction....if they say I don't care let's do this anyway...you arrest them since they now know you are a felon.......

You set up an undercover table at a gun show and ask each customer trying to buy a gun to go through a background check...if they say they can't pass the check you say...hey...let's do this anyway..and if they buy the gun anyway...you fucking arrest them since they know they can't own the gun and have just broken the law.......

no universal background check needed.....

That is just dumb.

Let's get rid of DUI limits as well. We'll just stop cars once in awhile and ask the driver if he's drunk. If he says "yes" we'll arrest him, if not , he can go on his way.