What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Nobody doubts the M4 is an assault weapon. Are there any material differences between an M4 and an AR15?

bigrebnc1775

][][][% NC Sheepdog
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
80,473
Reaction score
11,072
Points
2,070
Location
Kannapolis, N.C.
Okay....5 pages of answers.....soooo.....now what?
He's waiting for someone to say OMG THERES NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFSRENSE SO AR15S SHOULD BE BANNED HA CHECKMAET GUN NUTS
Sounds exciting. but no. I just asked a question.
Painfully transparent. You can stop pretending now.

Seems I forgot the republican superpower that allows them to spout unsupported crap and expect people to believe it.
So how many of those guns have been used in a commission of a crime?
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), as of 2017, there were 630,000 machine guns in the U.S.
Cool. If I ever start a thread on that, I'll keep that bit of information in mind.
that is your permiss, isn't it? and yes t's the topic
So answer the question how many of those 630,000 automatic firearms have been used in the commission of a crime?
 

bigrebnc1775

][][][% NC Sheepdog
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
80,473
Reaction score
11,072
Points
2,070
Location
Kannapolis, N.C.
Ok. I guess nobody can tell of any material differences, other than full auto/ 3 round burst, between the two rifles. In a heads up comparison, the AR shows to be better in a wide range of tactical shooting tests.
FYI the supreme court has already ruled that a weapon must be of use to a militia in order for it to be protected by the second amendment.
True, but as I have said many times, this thread has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment.
AR15'S are protected by the second amendment
 
OP
BULLDOG

BULLDOG

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Messages
73,676
Reaction score
14,738
Points
2,180
The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle. The M4 is capable of full automatic fire, and 3 round burst, and the AR15 is not. Of course, it would be illegal, but the AR15 can easily be converted to allow those types of fire. Other than that difference, what makes an M4 an assault weapon, and an AR15 not?
So if it's so easy to convert an Armalite Rifle 15 into an automatic Rifle explain how it's done?
Most information on conversion has been removed from the internet, but I believe a lightning link is the quickest and easiest way. An auto sear is pretty straight forward too, but a little harder to make in your garage.
you didn't read your source, did you?
"With fewer than 900 manufactured and registered in the NFA registry"
I posted that there are over 600 thousand automatic firearms in the public just like this they are all registered and limited access. So what is your gripe now?
Legality hasn't been part of the conversation from the start. Of course it's illegal to modify to fully automatic except under specific conditions with specific permissions. Ignoring legal concerns, the lightning link is nothing more than a couple of small pieces of relatively thin plate that could be shaped with a Dremel in a couple of hours at your kitchen table. I would call that an easy conversion.
 
OP
BULLDOG

BULLDOG

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Messages
73,676
Reaction score
14,738
Points
2,180
Okay....5 pages of answers.....soooo.....now what?
He's waiting for someone to say OMG THERES NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFSRENSE SO AR15S SHOULD BE BANNED HA CHECKMAET GUN NUTS
Sounds exciting. but no. I just asked a question.
Painfully transparent. You can stop pretending now.

Seems I forgot the republican superpower that allows them to spout unsupported crap and expect people to believe it.
So how many of those guns have been used in a commission of a crime?
According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), as of 2017, there were 630,000 machine guns in the U.S.
Cool. If I ever start a thread on that, I'll keep that bit of information in mind.
that is your permiss, isn't it? and yes t's the topic
So answer the question how many of those 630,000 automatic firearms have been used in the commission of a crime?
Don't know. Don't care. That's not what this thread is about.
 
OP
BULLDOG

BULLDOG

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Messages
73,676
Reaction score
14,738
Points
2,180
Ok. I guess nobody can tell of any material differences, other than full auto/ 3 round burst, between the two rifles. In a heads up comparison, the AR shows to be better in a wide range of tactical shooting tests.
FYI the supreme court has already ruled that a weapon must be of use to a militia in order for it to be protected by the second amendment.
True, but as I have said many times, this thread has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment.
AR15'S are protected by the second amendment
OK.
 

westwall

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
71,503
Reaction score
26,479
Points
2,250
Location
Nevada
The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle. The M4 is capable of full automatic fire, and 3 round burst, and the AR15 is not. Of course, it would be illegal, but the AR15 can easily be converted to allow those types of fire. Other than that difference, what makes an M4 an assault weapon, and an AR15 not?
So if it's so easy to convert an Armalite Rifle 15 into an automatic Rifle explain how it's done?
Most information on conversion has been removed from the internet, but I believe a lightning link is the quickest and easiest way. An auto sear is pretty straight forward too, but a little harder to make in your garage.
you didn't read your source, did you?
"With fewer than 900 manufactured and registered in the NFA registry"
I posted that there are over 600 thousand automatic firearms in the public just like this they are all registered and limited access. So what is your gripe now?
Legality hasn't been part of the conversation from the start. Of course it's illegal to modify to fully automatic except under specific conditions with specific permissions. Ignoring legal concerns, the lightning link is nothing more than a couple of small pieces of relatively thin plate that could be shaped with a Dremel in a couple of hours at your kitchen table. I would call that an easy conversion.






And that results in a slam fire which will eventually blow you, and your rifle to hell.
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
43,389
Reaction score
23,281
Points
2,645
Location
Florida
The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle. The M4 is capable of full automatic fire, and 3 round burst, and the AR15 is not. Of course, it would be illegal, but the AR15 can easily be converted to allow those types of fire. Other than that difference, what makes an M4 an assault weapon, and an AR15 not?
So if it's so easy to convert an Armalite Rifle 15 into an automatic Rifle explain how it's done?
Most information on conversion has been removed from the internet, but I believe a lightning link is the quickest and easiest way. An auto sear is pretty straight forward too, but a little harder to make in your garage.


So how many people use F-A weapons in the commission of a crime? The number comes close to zero. If anybody does it would be the gang bangers or drug cartel members and they would do it regardless of any law.

The weapon of choice for the great majority of crime in this country are cheap (often stolen) handguns. These handguns are often in possession of people that would denied under Federal, State or Local regulations already on the books.
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
43,389
Reaction score
23,281
Points
2,645
Location
Florida
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.

Those are rookie numbers and Fudd guns.

What we all know is that you can't trust Liberals with the definition of "reasonable". Liberals are never reasonable by any definition and besides their agenda is not to be reasonable but to do away the right to keep and bear arms because they perceive it to be an impediment to making the US a Socialist shithole. They don't want White Conservatives to have the ability to oppose their Socialist agenda.
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
43,389
Reaction score
23,281
Points
2,645
Location
Florida
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
Wonderful. But many have a problem with those idiots who do not understand enough to know what is/is not reasonable regulation of guns. I imagine everyone here has no problem with reasonable regulation such as restrictions on violent felons. But many have a very substantial problem giving up civil rights because of the paranoia of those who are unwilling to inform themselves. In my opinion Your rifles and shotguns are every bit as deadly as any assault rifle ever made.
Are background checks reasonable? Do you think you should be able to sell a gun to a stranger without a background check, and not even know his name, much less whether he can legally own a gun?
I'm all for background checks if they are accurate, conducted in a timely manner, and do not disqualify people without good reason. Also they provide no deterrent if those who attempt to fraudulently buy guns are not prosecuted and that is often lacking. The only problem I have with background checks is that they can disqualify people without good cause if they are allowed to do so and that must not be allowed.


I agree with you on almost everything but I respectively disagree with you on this. I am against all background checks for the following three reasons:

1. They simply don't work. Past behavior doesn't predict future behavior. For instance, several of the more recent mass shooters have passed background checks.

2. The background check only becomes a burden for law abiding citizens. People wanting to use a firearm for crime will simply ignore the background check process and get a firearm through other means. The more strict the background check the more back market in firearms.

3. (Most important) Having background checks circumvents the Bill of Rights. Americans should not have to get government permission to enjoy a right that is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and clearly says that the right cannot be infringed. A background check is nothing more than getting government permission and it is wrong. If you have to get government permission to enjoy a right that is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights then the BOR isn't worth the parchment it is written on.
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
14,079
Reaction score
4,718
Points
290
The M4 is the main rifle used by the US military, and no one could question that it is an assault rifle. The M4 is capable of full automatic fire, and 3 round burst, and the AR15 is not. Of course, it would be illegal, but the AR15 can easily be converted to allow those types of fire. Other than that difference, what makes an M4 an assault weapon, and an AR15 not?
If it was so easy to convert an AR 15 to fully automatic then why isn't it done ?

When was the last tinme you saw any mass shootings where a stock AR 15 had been converted to a fully automatic rifle?
I notice you haven't answered my question yet.

Why is that?
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
.

My first Deer rifle was a Winchester 30/30 ... Excellent firearm, I had the bush rifle, it was loud as hell and it would rock my world when it fired.
The .270 isn't a bad round, and they have new .245 round that just a screamer when it come to velocity and distance
I also have a Remington 870 Wingmaster that is my primary duck and dove gun.
I have a Mossberg 10 gauge for geese, that my hunting friends jokingly call "The Meat Cleaver".
I have a Charter Arms Undercover .38 revolver 5-Shot with a hammer.

So I would say we have a lot of the same things ... I have a shitload more guns than the ones listed though.
I don't have a problem with firearms, I have a problem with idiots who think they are going to define or try to regulate what is reasonable for me ... :thup:

.
Background checks? Do you oppose them?


I oppose Universal Background Checks. They are the trojan horse for gun registration. There is no rational reason to have them...
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
Background checks? Do you oppose them?
.

I have an NICS Number ... I don't give a rat's ass about Background Checks,
Nor do I have a problem handing any dealer money for a firearm and walking out the door with it as soon as ...
They scan my ID, I answer a few questions on the computer, and they give me change if necessary.

You see ... The assclowns on the Beltway are never going to make it so they cannot get whatever they want. whenever they want.
They may try to make it more expensive and cumbersome for the law-abiding American Citizen to exercise their Constitutionally Protected Rights ...
But they are never going to stop a criminal from utilizing straw purchases or breaking the law.

Those folks in the Banana Republic on Capitol Hill will tell you they are doing something good ...
When all they are really ever accomplishing is selling more guns.
Look up the numbers ... The ATF is approving over 3 million Federal Background Checks for new firearm purchases a month ...
And you think that makes a damn bit of difference as to where those guns are going, and who ends up with what?

That would be a bit of a Polly-Anna view of how effective gun control actually is ... :thup:

.
You don't think increased gun sales are mostly because all the hysterics about everybody's guns being confiscated, or for the hard core crazies, the hope for a real civil war?


The current increase in gun sales came from 7 months of blm and antifa burning and looting cities, and murdering 30 Americans.......but the biggest part of that driving the increased gun buying, especially among blacks, hispanics and women? Blm and antifa went into suburbs to march and vandalize as well.......and that scared a lot of people who hadn't thought to own a gun to go out and get one......

There are no hysterics about gun confiscation...the democrat party leadership has stated they want to ban and confiscate guns....they have stated they want to remove the protection from harassment lawsuits for gun makers and gun stores, beto o'rourke stated he wants to go house to house to confiscate AR-15s, the very gun we are talking about here......

They appoint anti-gun judges to the bench, they support gun and magazine bans at the state level.......

So don't tell us it is hysterics....we have seen human history and people like you push for gun control, and you don't stop ...
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
Wonderful. But many have a problem with those idiots who do not understand enough to know what is/is not reasonable regulation of guns. I imagine everyone here has no problem with reasonable regulation such as restrictions on violent felons. But many have a very substantial problem giving up civil rights because of the paranoia of those who are unwilling to inform themselves. In my opinion Your rifles and shotguns are every bit as deadly as any assault rifle ever made.
Are background checks reasonable? Do you think you should be able to sell a gun to a stranger without a background check, and not even know his name, much less whether he can legally own a gun?
I'm all for background checks if they are accurate, conducted in a timely manner, and do not disqualify people without good reason. Also they provide no deterrent if those who attempt to fraudulently buy guns are not prosecuted and that is often lacking. The only problem I have with background checks is that they can disqualify people without good cause if they are allowed to do so and that must not be allowed.


Background checks, in particular universal background checks for private sales, are nothing more than a trojan horse to get to gun registration.....and before that, they will never stop criminals or mass shooters from getting guns.
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I'm all for background checks if they are accurate, conducted in a timely manner, and do not disqualify people without good reason. Also they provide no deterrent if those who attempt to fraudulently buy guns are not prosecuted and that is often lacking. The only problem I have with background checks is that they can disqualify people without good cause if they are allowed to do so and that must not be allowed.
.

I only got a NICS Number because someone with a similar (not identical) name in the region had a felony conviction for hot checks.
Every time I would go to purchase a firearm, the computer would kick it back with a Hold ... Not a Denial.
Then I would have to wait up to two weeks for the ATF to do a more accurate search, and tell me I was Clear.

I got sick and tired of that ... And paid the extra money necessary to never worry about that shit again.

.


John Lott did research on the background check system and the majority of initial denials are due to names that are similar to the names of criminals...they don't use the same background check information they look at when you apply for a job.....the system isn't meant to work properly.....it is merely a layer of red tape to frustrate law abiding gun owners.
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
Wonderful. But many have a problem with those idiots who do not understand enough to know what is/is not reasonable regulation of guns. I imagine everyone here has no problem with reasonable regulation such as restrictions on violent felons. But many have a very substantial problem giving up civil rights because of the paranoia of those who are unwilling to inform themselves. In my opinion Your rifles and shotguns are every bit as deadly as any assault rifle ever made.
Are background checks reasonable? Do you think you should be able to sell a gun to a stranger without a background check, and not even know his name, much less whether he can legally own a gun?
I'm all for background checks if they are accurate, conducted in a timely manner, and do not disqualify people without good reason. Also they provide no deterrent if those who attempt to fraudulently buy guns are not prosecuted and that is often lacking. The only problem I have with background checks is that they can disqualify people without good cause if they are allowed to do so and that must not be allowed.
Do you think background checks from FFL sellers are mostly accurate, conducted in a timely manner? We both know there will be an occasional fuck up, but lets not nit pick it.


And here he moves into his real agenda.......
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
Wonderful. But many have a problem with those idiots who do not understand enough to know what is/is not reasonable regulation of guns. I imagine everyone here has no problem with reasonable regulation such as restrictions on violent felons. But many have a very substantial problem giving up civil rights because of the paranoia of those who are unwilling to inform themselves. In my opinion Your rifles and shotguns are every bit as deadly as any assault rifle ever made.
Are background checks reasonable? Do you think you should be able to sell a gun to a stranger without a background check, and not even know his name, much less whether he can legally own a gun?
I'm all for background checks if they are accurate, conducted in a timely manner, and do not disqualify people without good reason. Also they provide no deterrent if those who attempt to fraudulently buy guns are not prosecuted and that is often lacking. The only problem I have with background checks is that they can disqualify people without good cause if they are allowed to do so and that must not be allowed.
Do you think background checks from FFL sellers are mostly accurate, conducted in a timely manner? We both know there will be an occasional fuck up, but lets not nit pick it.


The Fuck ups aren't occasional...they make up the majority of initial denials.
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
Wonderful. But many have a problem with those idiots who do not understand enough to know what is/is not reasonable regulation of guns. I imagine everyone here has no problem with reasonable regulation such as restrictions on violent felons. But many have a very substantial problem giving up civil rights because of the paranoia of those who are unwilling to inform themselves. In my opinion Your rifles and shotguns are every bit as deadly as any assault rifle ever made.
Are background checks reasonable? Do you think you should be able to sell a gun to a stranger without a background check, and not even know his name, much less whether he can legally own a gun?
I'm all for background checks if they are accurate, conducted in a timely manner, and do not disqualify people without good reason. Also they provide no deterrent if those who attempt to fraudulently buy guns are not prosecuted and that is often lacking. The only problem I have with background checks is that they can disqualify people without good cause if they are allowed to do so and that must not be allowed.
Do you think background checks from FFL sellers are mostly accurate, conducted in a timely manner? We both know there will be an occasional fuck up, but lets not nit pick it.
It's my understanding that the FFL sellers do not do the actual check but that it is done using a government database by government for a fee. I am OK with it as it stands in my area. But there is nothing to stop government from suddenly demanding a hugh increase in fee that the average person could not afford. Or disqualifying people for frivolous reasons.
You are correct. Dealers don't do the actual check.
There's not a lot to prevent a lot of bad stuff that we might think of, but there is no reason to believe those things will actually happen.
If you are OK with the way background checks work, why wouldn't you think background checks conducted through licensed dealers for individual sales would be OK? Same checks conducted the same way.

And here we go.....what you really want to discuss....

Background checks for individual sales are simply a way to get to gun registration..

The anti-gun extremists tell uninformed Americans....we need universal background checks to keep guns out of the hands of criminals....

UBCs do not do this...criminals steal their guns, or they use straw buyers, people with clean records who can pass any background check.

Mass public shooters can typically pass any background check as well because they have no prior criminal record.

So the actual people doing all of the shooting on our streets are not effected by universal background checks.

Once the gang shootings continue, and mass public shootings continue to happen, people like bulldog will be back.....they will say......well, the reason we still have gang shootings and mass public shootings...is that the Universal Background Checks you let us install won't actually work unless we know who has guns.....they will then start with their democrat party media pushing gun registration...pushing the lie that they need gun registration in order for Universal background checks to work in order to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and mass public shooters....

See....it isn't about stopping criminals or mass public shooters..since Universal Background checks won't do that.....it is about getting the location of guns and who owns them so that when bulldog and the anti-gun extremists get the power, they will be able to ban and confiscate guns without the owners hiding them....

That, and all the other things they will sneak into any Bill they pass...for example...

Textual analysis of HR8, bill to "To require a background check for every firearm sale"

Summary

HR8 requires that loans, gifts, and sales of firearms be processed by a gun store. The same fees, paperwork, and permanent record-keeping apply as to buying a new gun from the store.

If you loan a gun to a friend without going to the gun store, the penalty is the same as for knowingly selling a gun to a convicted violent felon.

Likewise, when the friend returns the gun, another trip to the gun store is necessary, upon pain of felony.

A clever trick in HR8 effectively bans handguns for persons 18-to20.

The bill has some narrow exemptions. The minuscule exemption for self-defense does not cover stalking victims. None of the exemptions cover farming and ranching, sharing guns on almost all public and private lands, or storing guns with friends while on vacation. The limited exemption for family excludes first cousins and in-laws.
And this......they love this...


The bill authorizes unlimited fees to be imposed by
regulation.

-----
The narrowness of the self-defense exemption endangers domestic violence victims. For example, a former domestic partner threatens a woman and her children. An attack might come in the next hour, or the next month, or never. The victim and her children cannot know. Because the attack is uncertain—and is certainly not "immediate"—the woman cannot borrow a handgun from a neighbor for her defense. Many domestic violence victims do not have several hundred spare dollars so that they can buy their own gun. Sometimes, threats are manifested at night, when gun stores are not open.
-------

HR8 requires almost all firearms sales and loans to be conducted by a federally-licensed dealer. Because federal law prohibits licensed dealers from transferring handguns to persons under 21 years, HR8 prevents young adults from acquiring handguns. This is a clever way to enact a handgun ban indirectly.

HR8 would prohibit a 20-year-old woman who lives on her own from acquiring a handgun for self-defense in her home, such as by buying it from a relative or borrowing it from a friend.
-----


Exorbitant fees may be imposed by regulation

"(3)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Attorney General may implement this sub-section with regulations."

"(D) Regulations promulgated under this paragraph may not include any provision placing a cap on the fee licensees may charge to facilitate transfers in accordance with paragraph (1)."

Regulators may set a minimum fee, but not "a cap on a fee." The Attorney General is allowed to require that every gun store charge a fee of $30, $50, $150, or more. Even a $20 fee can be a hard burden to a poor person.

------
Family members

You can make a "a loan or bona fide gift" to some family members. In-laws and cousins are excluded.

The family exemption vanishes if one family member pays the other in any way. If a brother trades an extra shotgun to his sister in exchange for her extra television, both of them have to go to a gun store. Their exchange will have all the fees and paperwork as if she were buying a gun from
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
Wonderful. But many have a problem with those idiots who do not understand enough to know what is/is not reasonable regulation of guns. I imagine everyone here has no problem with reasonable regulation such as restrictions on violent felons. But many have a very substantial problem giving up civil rights because of the paranoia of those who are unwilling to inform themselves. In my opinion Your rifles and shotguns are every bit as deadly as any assault rifle ever made.
Are background checks reasonable? Do you think you should be able to sell a gun to a stranger without a background check, and not even know his name, much less whether he can legally own a gun?
I'm all for background checks if they are accurate, conducted in a timely manner, and do not disqualify people without good reason. Also they provide no deterrent if those who attempt to fraudulently buy guns are not prosecuted and that is often lacking. The only problem I have with background checks is that they can disqualify people without good cause if they are allowed to do so and that must not be allowed.
Do you think background checks from FFL sellers are mostly accurate, conducted in a timely manner? We both know there will be an occasional fuck up, but lets not nit pick it.
It's my understanding that the FFL sellers do not do the actual check but that it is done using a government database by government for a fee. I am OK with it as it stands in my area. But there is nothing to stop government from suddenly demanding a hugh increase in fee that the average person could not afford. Or disqualifying people for frivolous reasons.
You are correct. Dealers don't do the actual check.
There's not a lot to prevent a lot of bad stuff that we might think of, but there is no reason to believe those things will actually happen.
If you are OK with the way background checks work, why wouldn't you think background checks conducted through licensed dealers for individual sales would be OK? Same checks conducted the same way.
Also no reason to assume they won't.
If a person or establishment is selling a gun they are getting paid. Guns purchased out of state are required to be shipped to a FFL holder who charges a fee for their time and trouble. I have no doubt they would charge a fee for signing off on a background check. I have wished to buy guns for parts to use to enhance guns I already have or am working on. I have intended to buy a parts gun for $20 but was told I would have to pay an additional $20 for the background check despite the fact I had just had a background check for another gun. I have run into hard times and pawned guns then was required to pay for a background check to recover each gun even though they already belonged to me. Why should I have to pay someone else to be allowed to give a friend or relative a gift? Sometimes it is about the money and inconvenience. If a gun is worth $20 it may not be worth $40.


And that is all part of the plan...bulldog knows this.......supports this.......
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
Wonderful. But many have a problem with those idiots who do not understand enough to know what is/is not reasonable regulation of guns. I imagine everyone here has no problem with reasonable regulation such as restrictions on violent felons. But many have a very substantial problem giving up civil rights because of the paranoia of those who are unwilling to inform themselves. In my opinion Your rifles and shotguns are every bit as deadly as any assault rifle ever made.
Are background checks reasonable? Do you think you should be able to sell a gun to a stranger without a background check, and not even know his name, much less whether he can legally own a gun?





I have no problem with a background check so long as there is no gun information involved. Want to make it happen. Pass a law that absolves any seller of any crime done with a weapon they sell so long as a background check is done.


Have to disagree........this is what they will do when you let them get Universal Background Checks...this is in their actual Bills.......

The democrats tell the uniformed Americans they want background checks to keep crimnals from getting guns....but then they do this...

Textual analysis of HR8, bill to "To require a background check for every firearm sale"

Summary

HR8 requires that loans, gifts, and sales of firearms be processed by a gun store. The same fees, paperwork, and permanent record-keeping apply as to buying a new gun from the store.
If you loan a gun to a friend without going to the gun store, the penalty is the same as for knowingly selling a gun to a convicted violent felon.

Likewise, when the friend returns the gun, another trip to the gun store is necessary, upon pain of felony.

A clever trick in HR8 effectively bans handguns for persons 18-to20.

The bill has some narrow exemptions. The minuscule exemption for self-defense does not cover stalking victims. None of the exemptions cover farming and ranching, sharing guns on almost all public and private lands, or storing guns with friends while on vacation. The limited exemption for family excludes first cousins and in-laws.
And this......they love this...

The bill authorizes unlimited fees to be imposed by
regulation.

-----
The narrowness of the self-defense exemption endangers domestic violence victims. For example, a former domestic partner threatens a woman and her children. An attack might come in the next hour, or the next month, or never. The victim and her children cannot know. Because the attack is uncertain—and is certainly not "immediate"—the woman cannot borrow a handgun from a neighbor for her defense. Many domestic violence victims do not have several hundred spare dollars so that they can buy their own gun. Sometimes, threats are manifested at night, when gun stores are not open.
-------

HR8 requires almost all firearms sales and loans to be conducted by a federally-licensed dealer. Because federal law prohibits licensed dealers from transferring handguns to persons under 21 years, HR8 prevents young adults from acquiring handguns. This is a clever way to enact a handgun ban indirectly.

HR8 would prohibit a 20-year-old woman who lives on her own from acquiring a handgun for self-defense in her home, such as by buying it from a relative or borrowing it from a friend.
-----


Exorbitant fees may be imposed by regulation

"(3)(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Attorney General may implement this sub-section with regulations."

"(D)
Regulations promulgated under this paragraph may not include any provision placing a cap on the fee licensees may charge to facilitate transfers in accordance with paragraph (1)."

Regulators may set a minimum fee, but not "a cap on a fee." The Attorney General is allowed to require that every gun store charge a fee of $30, $50, $150, or more. Even a $20 fee can be a hard burden to a poor person.

------
Family members

You can make a "a loan or bona fide gift" to some family members. In-laws and cousins are excluded.

The family exemption vanishes if one family member pays the other in any way. If a brother trades an extra shotgun to his sister in exchange for her extra television, both of them have to go to a gun store. Their exchange will have all the fees and paperwork as if she were buying a gun from
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
88,815
Reaction score
28,392
Points
2,250
I have plenty of rifles and shotguns for hunting and a couple of pistols. I'm good.
.

Shit ... I'll hunt deer with a Patriot-Vortex .308 bolt action, but the Custom AR-15 style 7.62 x 39 with a infa-red scope is a hell of a lot better for hunting hogs.
Not to mention I wouldn't want to be on the bleeding end of either one of them in a tactical combat situation.

But screw it ... If you are happy with what you have, and don't have any concerns about what I have, then we are good to go ... :thup:

.
I live in east Texas, so I usually use a Winchester 30-30, but I have a .270 for the few times I have been able to go to west Texas. Deer meat is waaaaaay too expensive on those hunting leases. A 12 gauge 870 Remington, and an 8gauge that was my grandfathers with a barrel that looks to be about 5 ft long for geese (really 36"), and a 410 that I got for Christmas when I was about 8 or 9. A 32 pistol that I am afraid to shoot, and a 38 snub nose Rossi.
I don't have a problem with guns. I have a problem with idiots that oppose reasonable regulation of guns.
Wonderful. But many have a problem with those idiots who do not understand enough to know what is/is not reasonable regulation of guns. I imagine everyone here has no problem with reasonable regulation such as restrictions on violent felons. But many have a very substantial problem giving up civil rights because of the paranoia of those who are unwilling to inform themselves. In my opinion Your rifles and shotguns are every bit as deadly as any assault rifle ever made.
Are background checks reasonable? Do you think you should be able to sell a gun to a stranger without a background check, and not even know his name, much less whether he can legally own a gun?





I have no problem with a background check so long as there is no gun information involved. Want to make it happen. Pass a law that absolves any seller of any crime done with a weapon they sell so long as a background check is done.


This is one of their goals with background checks.....

"(D) Regulations promulgated under this paragraph may not include any provision placing a cap on the fee licensees may charge to facilitate transfers in accordance with paragraph (1)."
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$505.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top