CDZ Should we require criminal background checks before people can vote in elections?

[alang1216]

In most states it is against the law for felons to vote. So...according to the policies of the democrat party, who want gun control background checks before the exercise of the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms to make sure that felons don't buy guns.......should we require that all citizens who want to vote pass a criminal background check before they vote in each election?

Again, in most states, felons can't vote...so a background check is necessary to make sure they don't vote...dittos illegal aliens, who are essentially breaking the law by being in the country illegally.

As the anti-gunners tell us.....background checks don't keep people from buying guns, so what is the big deal....so what would be the big deal if background checks were required to vote?

Considering the damage votes can do to a country, it is just common sense...right?

I don't know where you're from but I registered to vote and they keep a list of eligible voters they check when I go to vote. Seems reasonable and doesn't interfere with my right to vote. So what's the problem with gun registration again?

No....not registering.....a complete criminal background check, the same used to buy a gun......and if you don't get the background check done, you don't vote....

If you think a complete criminal background check is a reasonable precaution, it should be done at the time the voter first registers. Thereafter, should a person become ineligible to vote, for whatever reason, a note to that effect would be placed in the voter database. When that voter attempts to vote, the database is checked and the voter is turned away. There is no need to do a complete criminal background check for every election, just keep the database current.

 

[2aguy]

In most states it is against the law for felons to vote. So...according to the policies of the democrat party, who want gun control background checks before the exercise of the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms to make sure that felons don't buy guns.......should we require that all citizens who want to vote pass a criminal background check before they vote in each election?

Again, in most states, felons can't vote...so a background check is necessary to make sure they don't vote...dittos illegal aliens, who are essentially breaking the law by being in the country illegally.

As the anti-gunners tell us.....background checks don't keep people from buying guns, so what is the big deal....so what would be the big deal if background checks were required to vote?

Considering the damage votes can do to a country, it is just common sense...right?

I don't know where you're from but I registered to vote and they keep a list of eligible voters they check when I go to vote. Seems reasonable and doesn't interfere with my right to vote. So what's the problem with gun registration again?

No....not registering.....a complete criminal background check, the same used to buy a gun......and if you don't get the background check done, you don't vote....

If you think a complete criminal background check is a reasonable precaution, it should be done at the time the voter first registers. Thereafter, should a person become ineligible to vote, for whatever reason, a note to that effect would be placed in the voter database. When that voter attempts to vote, the database is checked and the voter is turned away. There is no need to do a complete criminal background check for every election, just keep the database current.

Sorry....that isn't how it is done for guns....every time you buy a gun you have to go through a criminal background check. So, everytime you vote, at the local, state or federal level, you have to go through a background check 72 hours before you vote...otherwise you can't vote. We can't allow actual criminals to have a say in our government with trillions of dollars on the line, with the lives of innocent men, women and children on the line....

 

[2aguy]

In most states it is against the law for felons to vote. So...according to the policies of the democrat party, who want gun control background checks before the exercise of the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms to make sure that felons don't buy guns.......should we require that all citizens who want to vote pass a criminal background check before they vote in each election?

Again, in most states, felons can't vote...so a background check is necessary to make sure they don't vote...dittos illegal aliens, who are essentially breaking the law by being in the country illegally.

As the anti-gunners tell us.....background checks don't keep people from buying guns, so what is the big deal....so what would be the big deal if background checks were required to vote?

Considering the damage votes can do to a country, it is just common sense...right?

I don't know where you're from but I registered to vote and they keep a list of eligible voters they check when I go to vote. Seems reasonable and doesn't interfere with my right to vote. So what's the problem with gun registration again?

No....not registering.....a complete criminal background check, the same used to buy a gun......and if you don't get the background check done, you don't vote....

If you think a complete criminal background check is a reasonable precaution, it should be done at the time the voter first registers. Thereafter, should a person become ineligible to vote, for whatever reason, a note to that effect would be placed in the voter database. When that voter attempts to vote, the database is checked and the voter is turned away. There is no need to do a complete criminal background check for every election, just keep the database current.

I have a firearm owners identification card and a concealed carry permit....both required a criminal background check, and the concealed carry permit required fingerprints with the background check...

Every time I buy a gun I have to have a criminal background check.

 

[alang1216]

In most states it is against the law for felons to vote. So...according to the policies of the democrat party, who want gun control background checks before the exercise of the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms to make sure that felons don't buy guns.......should we require that all citizens who want to vote pass a criminal background check before they vote in each election?

Again, in most states, felons can't vote...so a background check is necessary to make sure they don't vote...dittos illegal aliens, who are essentially breaking the law by being in the country illegally.

As the anti-gunners tell us.....background checks don't keep people from buying guns, so what is the big deal....so what would be the big deal if background checks were required to vote?

Considering the damage votes can do to a country, it is just common sense...right?

I don't know where you're from but I registered to vote and they keep a list of eligible voters they check when I go to vote. Seems reasonable and doesn't interfere with my right to vote. So what's the problem with gun registration again?

Nothing but Democrat socialist communist type thinking found in your words spoken here, where as the Democrat way is to punish all of society for the bad actions of other's. Everyone must get a trophy or be accepted even when being bad, and if not, then just bring all of society down into the frey with'em just to make it fair. How sick is this bullcrap way of thinking ?

Do you think we need speed limits on our roads or can everyone be trusted to drive responsibly?

The trouble with your type of thinking is that you are essentially waiting for someone to act irresponsibly before reacting. This means innocent people will be harmed before any action it taken. As my sainted mother used to say, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

And yet 27 years of gun experiments in this country show you are wrong....speed limits don't stop people who want to speed from speeding...they define the consequences if you speed......gun laws don't stop criminals, they define the punishment for using a gun illegally......

Over the last 27 years, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2018...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

Don' t like my speed limit analogy? Fine. How about we go with a driver's license analogy? To be able to drive you have to be capable of demonstrating you can drive safely and legally. I like knowing that the vast majority of drivers at least know the basics of driving. Driving is not a right yet there are 221.7 million licensed drivers in the U.S. That bar doesn't seem so high to me and I'd like to know that someone carrying a gun at least knows the basics of how to use it safely and legally.

 

[alang1216]

In most states it is against the law for felons to vote. So...according to the policies of the democrat party, who want gun control background checks before the exercise of the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms to make sure that felons don't buy guns.......should we require that all citizens who want to vote pass a criminal background check before they vote in each election?

Again, in most states, felons can't vote...so a background check is necessary to make sure they don't vote...dittos illegal aliens, who are essentially breaking the law by being in the country illegally.

As the anti-gunners tell us.....background checks don't keep people from buying guns, so what is the big deal....so what would be the big deal if background checks were required to vote?

Considering the damage votes can do to a country, it is just common sense...right?

I don't know where you're from but I registered to vote and they keep a list of eligible voters they check when I go to vote. Seems reasonable and doesn't interfere with my right to vote. So what's the problem with gun registration again?

No....not registering.....a complete criminal background check, the same used to buy a gun......and if you don't get the background check done, you don't vote....

If you think a complete criminal background check is a reasonable precaution, it should be done at the time the voter first registers. Thereafter, should a person become ineligible to vote, for whatever reason, a note to that effect would be placed in the voter database. When that voter attempts to vote, the database is checked and the voter is turned away. There is no need to do a complete criminal background check for every election, just keep the database current.

Sorry....that isn't how it is done for guns....every time you buy a gun you have to go through a criminal background check. So, everytime you vote, at the local, state or federal level, you have to go through a background check 72 hours before you vote...otherwise you can't vote. We can't allow actual criminals to have a say in our government with trillions of dollars on the line, with the lives of innocent men, women and children on the line....

Have gun owners pressed for a national gun registry to solve the problem or have they fought it?

 

[alang1216]

In most states it is against the law for felons to vote. So...according to the policies of the democrat party, who want gun control background checks before the exercise of the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms to make sure that felons don't buy guns.......should we require that all citizens who want to vote pass a criminal background check before they vote in each election?

Again, in most states, felons can't vote...so a background check is necessary to make sure they don't vote...dittos illegal aliens, who are essentially breaking the law by being in the country illegally.

As the anti-gunners tell us.....background checks don't keep people from buying guns, so what is the big deal....so what would be the big deal if background checks were required to vote?

Considering the damage votes can do to a country, it is just common sense...right?

I don't know where you're from but I registered to vote and they keep a list of eligible voters they check when I go to vote. Seems reasonable and doesn't interfere with my right to vote. So what's the problem with gun registration again?

No....not registering.....a complete criminal background check, the same used to buy a gun......and if you don't get the background check done, you don't vote....

If you think a complete criminal background check is a reasonable precaution, it should be done at the time the voter first registers. Thereafter, should a person become ineligible to vote, for whatever reason, a note to that effect would be placed in the voter database. When that voter attempts to vote, the database is checked and the voter is turned away. There is no need to do a complete criminal background check for every election, just keep the database current.

I have a firearm owners identification card and a concealed carry permit....both required a criminal background check, and the concealed carry permit required fingerprints with the background check...

Every time I buy a gun I have to have a criminal background check.

You should demand a national gun registry so you're not inconvenienced.

 

[2aguy]

In most states it is against the law for felons to vote. So...according to the policies of the democrat party, who want gun control background checks before the exercise of the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms to make sure that felons don't buy guns.......should we require that all citizens who want to vote pass a criminal background check before they vote in each election?

Again, in most states, felons can't vote...so a background check is necessary to make sure they don't vote...dittos illegal aliens, who are essentially breaking the law by being in the country illegally.

As the anti-gunners tell us.....background checks don't keep people from buying guns, so what is the big deal....so what would be the big deal if background checks were required to vote?

Considering the damage votes can do to a country, it is just common sense...right?

I don't know where you're from but I registered to vote and they keep a list of eligible voters they check when I go to vote. Seems reasonable and doesn't interfere with my right to vote. So what's the problem with gun registration again?

Nothing but Democrat socialist communist type thinking found in your words spoken here, where as the Democrat way is to punish all of society for the bad actions of other's. Everyone must get a trophy or be accepted even when being bad, and if not, then just bring all of society down into the frey with'em just to make it fair. How sick is this bullcrap way of thinking ?

Do you think we need speed limits on our roads or can everyone be trusted to drive responsibly?

The trouble with your type of thinking is that you are essentially waiting for someone to act irresponsibly before reacting. This means innocent people will be harmed before any action it taken. As my sainted mother used to say, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

And yet 27 years of gun experiments in this country show you are wrong....speed limits don't stop people who want to speed from speeding...they define the consequences if you speed......gun laws don't stop criminals, they define the punishment for using a gun illegally......

Over the last 27 years, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2018...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

Don' t like my speed limit analogy? Fine. How about we go with a driver's license analogy? To be able to drive you have to be capable of demonstrating you can drive safely and legally. I like knowing that the vast majority of drivers at least know the basics of driving. Driving is not a right yet there are 221.7 million licensed drivers in the U.S. That bar doesn't seem so high to me and I'd like to know that someone carrying a gun at least knows the basics of how to use it safely and legally.

And that has nothing to do with a Right. Voting and owning a gun are Rights, they are not subject to licensing by the government.

And again.....we now have more than 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense and our gun murder rate went down 49%...our gun crime rate went down 75%.....our gun accident rate is also down.......

And as we know from history....one of the first techniques to prevent people from exercising a Right is to put requirements on the exercise of that Right that eventually become so massive that only the rich and politically connected can exercise those Right...

Democrats used Poll Taxes and Literacy tests to keep blacks from voting.....national socialists and the rest of Europe use licensing and testing to keep regular citizens from owning guns....and democrat party controlled cities currently use the licensing process to deny people the Right to own and carry guns........

So what you want is 1) UnConstitutional, and 2) the government will use any licensing scheme to prevent people from exercising their Rights...

 

[2aguy]

In most states it is against the law for felons to vote. So...according to the policies of the democrat party, who want gun control background checks before the exercise of the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms to make sure that felons don't buy guns.......should we require that all citizens who want to vote pass a criminal background check before they vote in each election?

Again, in most states, felons can't vote...so a background check is necessary to make sure they don't vote...dittos illegal aliens, who are essentially breaking the law by being in the country illegally.

As the anti-gunners tell us.....background checks don't keep people from buying guns, so what is the big deal....so what would be the big deal if background checks were required to vote?

Considering the damage votes can do to a country, it is just common sense...right?

I don't know where you're from but I registered to vote and they keep a list of eligible voters they check when I go to vote. Seems reasonable and doesn't interfere with my right to vote. So what's the problem with gun registration again?

No....not registering.....a complete criminal background check, the same used to buy a gun......and if you don't get the background check done, you don't vote....

If you think a complete criminal background check is a reasonable precaution, it should be done at the time the voter first registers. Thereafter, should a person become ineligible to vote, for whatever reason, a note to that effect would be placed in the voter database. When that voter attempts to vote, the database is checked and the voter is turned away. There is no need to do a complete criminal background check for every election, just keep the database current.

Sorry....that isn't how it is done for guns....every time you buy a gun you have to go through a criminal background check. So, everytime you vote, at the local, state or federal level, you have to go through a background check 72 hours before you vote...otherwise you can't vote. We can't allow actual criminals to have a say in our government with trillions of dollars on the line, with the lives of innocent men, women and children on the line....

Have gun owners pressed for a national gun registry to solve the problem or have they fought it?

They fight gun registration because the only reason to register guns is to ban and confiscate them. We also know how this works from history...Britain, Germany, France, Russia.......registration is the precursor to confiscation.

 

[Coyote]

In most states it is against the law for felons to vote. So...according to the policies of the democrat party, who want gun control background checks before the exercise of the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms to make sure that felons don't buy guns.......should we require that all citizens who want to vote pass a criminal background check before they vote in each election?

Again, in most states, felons can't vote...so a background check is necessary to make sure they don't vote...dittos illegal aliens, who are essentially breaking the law by being in the country illegally.

As the anti-gunners tell us.....background checks don't keep people from buying guns, so what is the big deal....so what would be the big deal if background checks were required to vote?

Considering the damage votes can do to a country, it is just common sense...right?

Voting doesn't kill people.

Guns do.

Voting was not designed as a tool to kill people.

Guns are.

You have to be a citizen to vote.

You don't have to be a citizen to have a gun.





Different rights, different levels of regulation.

Stupid comparison.

 

[2aguy]

In most states it is against the law for felons to vote. So...according to the policies of the democrat party, who want gun control background checks before the exercise of the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms to make sure that felons don't buy guns.......should we require that all citizens who want to vote pass a criminal background check before they vote in each election?

Again, in most states, felons can't vote...so a background check is necessary to make sure they don't vote...dittos illegal aliens, who are essentially breaking the law by being in the country illegally.

As the anti-gunners tell us.....background checks don't keep people from buying guns, so what is the big deal....so what would be the big deal if background checks were required to vote?

Considering the damage votes can do to a country, it is just common sense...right?

Voting doesn't kill people.

Guns do.

Voting was not designed as a tool to kill people.

Guns are.

You have to be a citizen to vote.

You don't have to be a citizen to have a gun.





Different rights, different levels of regulation.

Stupid comparison.

Voting doesn't kill people? Are you serious? The policies of the different political parties do, in fact, end up killing people...just look at cities controlled by the democrat party and their criminal justice policies. Obama gave 150 billion dollars in cash to the leading state sponsor of terrorism and murder...that money killed people.....and people voted for that policy by electing obama....

You really need to think about that again....

 

[alang1216]

I don't know where you're from but I registered to vote and they keep a list of eligible voters they check when I go to vote. Seems reasonable and doesn't interfere with my right to vote. So what's the problem with gun registration again?

Nothing but Democrat socialist communist type thinking found in your words spoken here, where as the Democrat way is to punish all of society for the bad actions of other's. Everyone must get a trophy or be accepted even when being bad, and if not, then just bring all of society down into the frey with'em just to make it fair. How sick is this bullcrap way of thinking ?

Do you think we need speed limits on our roads or can everyone be trusted to drive responsibly?

The trouble with your type of thinking is that you are essentially waiting for someone to act irresponsibly before reacting. This means innocent people will be harmed before any action it taken. As my sainted mother used to say, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

And yet 27 years of gun experiments in this country show you are wrong....speed limits don't stop people who want to speed from speeding...they define the consequences if you speed......gun laws don't stop criminals, they define the punishment for using a gun illegally......

Over the last 27 years, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2018...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

Don' t like my speed limit analogy? Fine. How about we go with a driver's license analogy? To be able to drive you have to be capable of demonstrating you can drive safely and legally. I like knowing that the vast majority of drivers at least know the basics of driving. Driving is not a right yet there are 221.7 million licensed drivers in the U.S. That bar doesn't seem so high to me and I'd like to know that someone carrying a gun at least knows the basics of how to use it safely and legally.

And that has nothing to do with a Right. Voting and owning a gun are Rights, they are not subject to licensing by the government.

And again.....we now have more than 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense and our gun murder rate went down 49%...our gun crime rate went down 75%.....our gun accident rate is also down.......

And as we know from history....one of the first techniques to prevent people from exercising a Right is to put requirements on the exercise of that Right that eventually become so massive that only the rich and politically connected can exercise those Right...

Democrats used Poll Taxes and Literacy tests to keep blacks from voting.....national socialists and the rest of Europe use licensing and testing to keep regular citizens from owning guns....and democrat party controlled cities currently use the licensing process to deny people the Right to own and carry guns........

So what you want is 1) UnConstitutional, and 2) the government will use any licensing scheme to prevent people from exercising their Rights...

The right to vote is restricted. The right to own a gun is also restricted. There are good reasons for both and I don't buy the 'slippery slope' argument.

 

[alang1216]

I don't know where you're from but I registered to vote and they keep a list of eligible voters they check when I go to vote. Seems reasonable and doesn't interfere with my right to vote. So what's the problem with gun registration again?

No....not registering.....a complete criminal background check, the same used to buy a gun......and if you don't get the background check done, you don't vote....

If you think a complete criminal background check is a reasonable precaution, it should be done at the time the voter first registers. Thereafter, should a person become ineligible to vote, for whatever reason, a note to that effect would be placed in the voter database. When that voter attempts to vote, the database is checked and the voter is turned away. There is no need to do a complete criminal background check for every election, just keep the database current.

Sorry....that isn't how it is done for guns....every time you buy a gun you have to go through a criminal background check. So, everytime you vote, at the local, state or federal level, you have to go through a background check 72 hours before you vote...otherwise you can't vote. We can't allow actual criminals to have a say in our government with trillions of dollars on the line, with the lives of innocent men, women and children on the line....

Have gun owners pressed for a national gun registry to solve the problem or have they fought it?

They fight gun registration because the only reason to register guns is to ban and confiscate them. We also know how this works from history...Britain, Germany, France, Russia.......registration is the precursor to confiscation.

Yet you whine about having to have a complete criminal background check every time you buy a gun. It seems to me there is at least one good reason to register guns after all.

 

[2aguy]

Nothing but Democrat socialist communist type thinking found in your words spoken here, where as the Democrat way is to punish all of society for the bad actions of other's. Everyone must get a trophy or be accepted even when being bad, and if not, then just bring all of society down into the frey with'em just to make it fair. How sick is this bullcrap way of thinking ?

Do you think we need speed limits on our roads or can everyone be trusted to drive responsibly?

The trouble with your type of thinking is that you are essentially waiting for someone to act irresponsibly before reacting. This means innocent people will be harmed before any action it taken. As my sainted mother used to say, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

And yet 27 years of gun experiments in this country show you are wrong....speed limits don't stop people who want to speed from speeding...they define the consequences if you speed......gun laws don't stop criminals, they define the punishment for using a gun illegally......

Over the last 27 years, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2018...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

Don' t like my speed limit analogy? Fine. How about we go with a driver's license analogy? To be able to drive you have to be capable of demonstrating you can drive safely and legally. I like knowing that the vast majority of drivers at least know the basics of driving. Driving is not a right yet there are 221.7 million licensed drivers in the U.S. That bar doesn't seem so high to me and I'd like to know that someone carrying a gun at least knows the basics of how to use it safely and legally.

And that has nothing to do with a Right. Voting and owning a gun are Rights, they are not subject to licensing by the government.

And again.....we now have more than 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense and our gun murder rate went down 49%...our gun crime rate went down 75%.....our gun accident rate is also down.......

And as we know from history....one of the first techniques to prevent people from exercising a Right is to put requirements on the exercise of that Right that eventually become so massive that only the rich and politically connected can exercise those Right...

Democrats used Poll Taxes and Literacy tests to keep blacks from voting.....national socialists and the rest of Europe use licensing and testing to keep regular citizens from owning guns....and democrat party controlled cities currently use the licensing process to deny people the Right to own and carry guns........

So what you want is 1) UnConstitutional, and 2) the government will use any licensing scheme to prevent people from exercising their Rights...

The right to vote is restricted. The right to own a gun is also restricted. There are good reasons for both and I don't buy the 'slippery slope' argument.

Of course you don't care about the slippery slope argument, you want guns banned. History shows that the slippery slope is real and has been applied in Britain, Germany, France, Russia, Australia.......

felons can't own a gun, felons can't vote......to get a gun you need a criminal background check, so you should have to go through a background check to vote...it is just common sense.

 

[2aguy]

No....not registering.....a complete criminal background check, the same used to buy a gun......and if you don't get the background check done, you don't vote....

If you think a complete criminal background check is a reasonable precaution, it should be done at the time the voter first registers. Thereafter, should a person become ineligible to vote, for whatever reason, a note to that effect would be placed in the voter database. When that voter attempts to vote, the database is checked and the voter is turned away. There is no need to do a complete criminal background check for every election, just keep the database current.

Sorry....that isn't how it is done for guns....every time you buy a gun you have to go through a criminal background check. So, everytime you vote, at the local, state or federal level, you have to go through a background check 72 hours before you vote...otherwise you can't vote. We can't allow actual criminals to have a say in our government with trillions of dollars on the line, with the lives of innocent men, women and children on the line....

Have gun owners pressed for a national gun registry to solve the problem or have they fought it?

They fight gun registration because the only reason to register guns is to ban and confiscate them. We also know how this works from history...Britain, Germany, France, Russia.......registration is the precursor to confiscation.

Yet you whine about having to have a complete criminal background check every time you buy a gun. It seems to me there is at least one good reason to register guns after all.

Yes.....a Right infringed is a Right denied. Yes...you guys know that you need gun registration before you ban and confiscate guns.......

 

[Montrovant]

Even assuming your argument is accurate, there is a big difference between the two things: voting is time-restricted.

So.....you just make the person get the background check 24 hours before they vote......or 72 hours like they do to buy a gun.......

Because of the timing issue, background checks would be more of a burden for voting. That would make the idea harder to pass legal muster, I would imagine.

 

[alang1216]

Do you think we need speed limits on our roads or can everyone be trusted to drive responsibly?

The trouble with your type of thinking is that you are essentially waiting for someone to act irresponsibly before reacting. This means innocent people will be harmed before any action it taken. As my sainted mother used to say, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

And yet 27 years of gun experiments in this country show you are wrong....speed limits don't stop people who want to speed from speeding...they define the consequences if you speed......gun laws don't stop criminals, they define the punishment for using a gun illegally......

Over the last 27 years, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2018...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

Don' t like my speed limit analogy? Fine. How about we go with a driver's license analogy? To be able to drive you have to be capable of demonstrating you can drive safely and legally. I like knowing that the vast majority of drivers at least know the basics of driving. Driving is not a right yet there are 221.7 million licensed drivers in the U.S. That bar doesn't seem so high to me and I'd like to know that someone carrying a gun at least knows the basics of how to use it safely and legally.

And that has nothing to do with a Right. Voting and owning a gun are Rights, they are not subject to licensing by the government.

And again.....we now have more than 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense and our gun murder rate went down 49%...our gun crime rate went down 75%.....our gun accident rate is also down.......

And as we know from history....one of the first techniques to prevent people from exercising a Right is to put requirements on the exercise of that Right that eventually become so massive that only the rich and politically connected can exercise those Right...

Democrats used Poll Taxes and Literacy tests to keep blacks from voting.....national socialists and the rest of Europe use licensing and testing to keep regular citizens from owning guns....and democrat party controlled cities currently use the licensing process to deny people the Right to own and carry guns........

So what you want is 1) UnConstitutional, and 2) the government will use any licensing scheme to prevent people from exercising their Rights...

The right to vote is restricted. The right to own a gun is also restricted. There are good reasons for both and I don't buy the 'slippery slope' argument.

Of course you don't care about the slippery slope argument, you want guns banned. History shows that the slippery slope is real and has been applied in Britain, Germany, France, Russia, Australia.......

felons can't own a gun, felons can't vote......to get a gun you need a criminal background check, so you should have to go through a background check to vote...it is just common sense.

You obviously don't know what I want even though I've been clear from the start. I want to know that gun owners, like drivers, know what they are doing and are entitled to do what they are doing. I have no desire to confiscate your hunting rifle. Don't expect me to get onto your paranoia platform of what might one day happen or agree that your ideas are just 'common sense'.

 

[alang1216]

If you think a complete criminal background check is a reasonable precaution, it should be done at the time the voter first registers. Thereafter, should a person become ineligible to vote, for whatever reason, a note to that effect would be placed in the voter database. When that voter attempts to vote, the database is checked and the voter is turned away. There is no need to do a complete criminal background check for every election, just keep the database current.

Sorry....that isn't how it is done for guns....every time you buy a gun you have to go through a criminal background check. So, everytime you vote, at the local, state or federal level, you have to go through a background check 72 hours before you vote...otherwise you can't vote. We can't allow actual criminals to have a say in our government with trillions of dollars on the line, with the lives of innocent men, women and children on the line....

Have gun owners pressed for a national gun registry to solve the problem or have they fought it?

They fight gun registration because the only reason to register guns is to ban and confiscate them. We also know how this works from history...Britain, Germany, France, Russia.......registration is the precursor to confiscation.

Yet you whine about having to have a complete criminal background check every time you buy a gun. It seems to me there is at least one good reason to register guns after all.

Yes.....a Right infringed is a Right denied. Yes...you guys know that you need gun registration before you ban and confiscate guns.......

BS Every right you can think of is 'infringed' in some way and should be. Guns are no different.

 

[candycorn]

A moronic idea.

 

[2aguy]

And yet 27 years of gun experiments in this country show you are wrong....speed limits don't stop people who want to speed from speeding...they define the consequences if you speed......gun laws don't stop criminals, they define the punishment for using a gun illegally......

Over the last 27 years, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2018...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

Don' t like my speed limit analogy? Fine. How about we go with a driver's license analogy? To be able to drive you have to be capable of demonstrating you can drive safely and legally. I like knowing that the vast majority of drivers at least know the basics of driving. Driving is not a right yet there are 221.7 million licensed drivers in the U.S. That bar doesn't seem so high to me and I'd like to know that someone carrying a gun at least knows the basics of how to use it safely and legally.

And that has nothing to do with a Right. Voting and owning a gun are Rights, they are not subject to licensing by the government.

And again.....we now have more than 18.6 million people carrying guns for self defense and our gun murder rate went down 49%...our gun crime rate went down 75%.....our gun accident rate is also down.......

And as we know from history....one of the first techniques to prevent people from exercising a Right is to put requirements on the exercise of that Right that eventually become so massive that only the rich and politically connected can exercise those Right...

Democrats used Poll Taxes and Literacy tests to keep blacks from voting.....national socialists and the rest of Europe use licensing and testing to keep regular citizens from owning guns....and democrat party controlled cities currently use the licensing process to deny people the Right to own and carry guns........

So what you want is 1) UnConstitutional, and 2) the government will use any licensing scheme to prevent people from exercising their Rights...

The right to vote is restricted. The right to own a gun is also restricted. There are good reasons for both and I don't buy the 'slippery slope' argument.

Of course you don't care about the slippery slope argument, you want guns banned. History shows that the slippery slope is real and has been applied in Britain, Germany, France, Russia, Australia.......

felons can't own a gun, felons can't vote......to get a gun you need a criminal background check, so you should have to go through a background check to vote...it is just common sense.

You obviously don't know what I want even though I've been clear from the start. I want to know that gun owners, like drivers, know what they are doing and are entitled to do what they are doing. I have no desire to confiscate your hunting rifle. Don't expect me to get onto your paranoia platform of what might one day happen or agree that your ideas are just 'common sense'.

That "hunting rifle," is an actual military weapon...not a military "style" weapon...so yes...down the line you will demand it be banned......the "hunting rifle," bolt action rifle.....is in current use by the U.S. military........so please.....you want that gun too....

And again....."just want to know that gun owners know what they are doing..." turns into rules and regulations that will prohibit normal people, through time and expense, from being able to own and carry guns...that is how they do it in Europe. The rules and regulations that you have to know to own the few shotgun models for hunting birds in Britain are so excessive, only the wealthy and politically connected can make it through the hurdles...

So no.....you are wrong.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A moronic idea.

You prefer to let Putin hack our democracy again, eh Komrade