The Gun Owner Database- Another Way To Skin The Cat

[bendog]

By going through a background check? I disagree.

You cannot demonstrate the necessity and efficacy of the requirement for a universal background check - thus, your disagreement means nothing, and does not change the fact you seek to place unnecessary and ineffective restrictions on his - and everyone else's - right to keep and bear arms.

I can't...

At all. I know.
Why does the fact you cannot demonstrate its necessity or efficacy of a restriction not in any way prevent you from supporting it?

I did but you're an extremist who isn't going to accept anything I say.

cause you haven't said anything. you think you can monitor private sales! and you don't know they already do background checks. hmmmm what else you got?

Fine anyone who sells a gun in a private sale a nominal amount but make it very punative if the firearm is used in a crime. It'll never happen on a national level, but any state can do it for sales inside it's boundary.

 

[jc456]

By going through a background check? I disagree.

You cannot demonstrate the necessity and efficacy of the requirement for a universal background check - thus, your disagreement means nothing, and does not change the fact you seek to place unnecessary and ineffective restrictions on his - and everyone else's - right to keep and bear arms.

I can't to an extremist who is going to disagree with everything I say. But we did see a guy circumvent the background check system after failing by buying a gun from a private seller and then use that gun to kill 7 and wound over 20. Reason enough for me.

Nobody cares what's reason enough for you. You are not some special snowflake.

Like I was told when I was a child:

"You're not the only pebble on the beach". *****.

Yeah, 80-90 out of a hundred pebbles agree with me, but Ok.

Compromise? I do. Gun control for example, I'm for background checks as are most Americans, I think gun classification bans can be effective but I can also see both sides of that and while it is constitutional I'd be happy with just the background checks.

background checks exist. so, not sure what it is you think is next. you leftist always wish to punish 99% of the population for a 1% something, that we know a criminal will not obey anyway. so, your entire premise is false, and we already do background checks as I stated.

Not for all sales so....try to keep up.

yep, background checks exist today.

Not for private sales.

How does that apply when a friend gives you a gun, hmm?

dude, I guess he's a fking god. I'll ask, HappyJoy Are you a fking GOD?

 

[HappyJoy]

Compromise? I do. Gun control for example, I'm for background checks as are most Americans, I think gun classification bans can be effective but I can also see both sides of that and while it is constitutional I'd be happy with just the background checks.

background checks exist. so, not sure what it is you think is next. you leftist always wish to punish 99% of the population for a 1% something, that we know a criminal will not obey anyway. so, your entire premise is false, and we already do background checks as I stated.

Not for all sales so....try to keep up.

yep, background checks exist today.

Not for private sales.

that's outside governance, you'll never control that, explain how you stop a somebody, you have no idea exists?

I doubt every background check would be performed. However if you sell a gun to someone and that person is arrested with the gun and tells the cops who they bought it from and whether a background check were performed then the seller could be in trouble. Plus, most people will want to follow the law and do their due diligence to ensure they aren't selling to someone who shouldn't have one.

 

[jc456]

You cannot demonstrate the necessity and efficacy of the requirement for a universal background check - thus, your disagreement means nothing, and does not change the fact you seek to place unnecessary and ineffective restrictions on his - and everyone else's - right to keep and bear arms.

I can't...

At all. I know.
Why does the fact you cannot demonstrate its necessity or efficacy of a restriction not in any way prevent you from supporting it?

I did but you're an extremist who isn't going to accept anything I say.

cause you haven't said anything. you think you can monitor private sales! and you don't know they already do background checks. hmmmm what else you got?

Seller is responsible if gun sold is used in a crime. That will fix that.

that exists today friend. you got to find something new. go

 

[jc456]

You cannot demonstrate the necessity and efficacy of the requirement for a universal background check - thus, your disagreement means nothing, and does not change the fact you seek to place unnecessary and ineffective restrictions on his - and everyone else's - right to keep and bear arms.

I can't...

At all. I know.
Why does the fact you cannot demonstrate its necessity or efficacy of a restriction not in any way prevent you from supporting it?

I did but you're an extremist who isn't going to accept anything I say.

cause you haven't said anything. you think you can monitor private sales! and you don't know they already do background checks. hmmmm what else you got?

Fine anyone who sells a gun in a private sale a nominal amount but make it very punative if the firearm is used in a crime. It'll never happen on a national level, but any state can do it for sales inside it's boundary.

that exists today as well. you all still haven't offered up anything new.

 

[bendog]

You cannot demonstrate the necessity and efficacy of the requirement for a universal background check - thus, your disagreement means nothing, and does not change the fact you seek to place unnecessary and ineffective restrictions on his - and everyone else's - right to keep and bear arms.

I can't...

At all. I know.
Why does the fact you cannot demonstrate its necessity or efficacy of a restriction not in any way prevent you from supporting it?

I did but you're an extremist who isn't going to accept anything I say.

cause you haven't said anything. you think you can monitor private sales! and you don't know they already do background checks. hmmmm what else you got?

Seller is responsible if gun sold is used in a crime. That will fix that.

Can't put them in jail, and shouldn't but sure, a state can put fines on things like improper storage, illegal sale, loaning to a person who couldn't pass a check, etc.

 

[Vastator]

Why not..?

 

[HappyJoy]

80-90% do and I provided multiple polls to back me up. Also a link to a bill the house passed that would make background checks mandatory for all sales. The only reason it's not up for a vote is because Mitch won't put it up. What more do you want?

Here's a poll for you:

From 11/08/2016:

Punk. How accurate is/was it, hmm?

Mary, not only did you not know who was in charge of the DOJ, your retarded ass also does not know what a poll is.

what is a poll, a sample of 100 out of 330 million, and then you get to say 80 to 90%?

More than 100. Polls work, they've proven to be accurate and it's much better than the nothing you have.

101? polls are a fking farce and interference in our lives. I shit on them

They aren't, especially when you have several polls that reaffirm eiach other, in this case they do. You have nothing on your side.

 

[jc456]

background checks exist. so, not sure what it is you think is next. you leftist always wish to punish 99% of the population for a 1% something, that we know a criminal will not obey anyway. so, your entire premise is false, and we already do background checks as I stated.

Not for all sales so....try to keep up.

yep, background checks exist today.

Not for private sales.

that's outside governance, you'll never control that, explain how you stop a somebody, you have no idea exists?

I doubt every background check would be performed. However if you sell a gun to someone and that person is arrested with the gun and tells the cops who they bought it from and whether a background check were performed then the seller could be in trouble. Plus, most people will want to follow the law and do their due diligence to ensure they aren't selling to someone who shouldn't have one.

if you buy a gun from a dealer a background check is done, PERIOD!!! you believe the leftists too much.

 

[Brain357]

I can't...

At all. I know.
Why does the fact you cannot demonstrate its necessity or efficacy of a restriction not in any way prevent you from supporting it?

I did but you're an extremist who isn't going to accept anything I say.

cause you haven't said anything. you think you can monitor private sales! and you don't know they already do background checks. hmmmm what else you got?

Seller is responsible if gun sold is used in a crime. That will fix that.

that exists today friend. you got to find something new. go

So how is the seller to our most recent TX mass shooter being prosecuted?

 

[jc456]

I can't...

At all. I know.
Why does the fact you cannot demonstrate its necessity or efficacy of a restriction not in any way prevent you from supporting it?

I did but you're an extremist who isn't going to accept anything I say.

cause you haven't said anything. you think you can monitor private sales! and you don't know they already do background checks. hmmmm what else you got?

Seller is responsible if gun sold is used in a crime. That will fix that.

Can't put them in jail, and shouldn't but sure, a state can put fines on things like improper storage, illegal sale, loaning to a person who couldn't pass a check, etc.

it exists today.

 

[Marion Morrison]

background checks exist. so, not sure what it is you think is next. you leftist always wish to punish 99% of the population for a 1% something, that we know a criminal will not obey anyway. so, your entire premise is false, and we already do background checks as I stated.

Not for all sales so....try to keep up.

yep, background checks exist today.

Not for private sales.

that's outside governance, you'll never control that, explain how you stop a somebody, you have no idea exists?

I doubt every background check would be performed. However if you sell a gun to someone and that person is arrested with the gun and tells the cops who they bought it from and whether a background check were performed then the seller could be in trouble. Plus, most people will want to follow the law and do their due diligence to ensure they aren't selling to someone who shouldn't have one.

**** off, you communist turd, k? I have guns from both World Wars. Go **** yourself with your inane commie gun registration bullshit.

This is America, K? Just in case you didn't comprehend that: This is America, *****!

 

[jc456]

At all. I know.
Why does the fact you cannot demonstrate its necessity or efficacy of a restriction not in any way prevent you from supporting it?

I did but you're an extremist who isn't going to accept anything I say.

cause you haven't said anything. you think you can monitor private sales! and you don't know they already do background checks. hmmmm what else you got?

Seller is responsible if gun sold is used in a crime. That will fix that.

that exists today friend. you got to find something new. go

So how is the seller to our most recent TX mass shooter being prosecuted?

is it in court yet?

 

[Brain357]

I can't...

At all. I know.
Why does the fact you cannot demonstrate its necessity or efficacy of a restriction not in any way prevent you from supporting it?

I did but you're an extremist who isn't going to accept anything I say.

cause you haven't said anything. you think you can monitor private sales! and you don't know they already do background checks. hmmmm what else you got?

Seller is responsible if gun sold is used in a crime. That will fix that.

Can't put them in jail, and shouldn't but sure, a state can put fines on things like improper storage, illegal sale, loaning to a person who couldn't pass a check, etc.

Why not put them in jail?

 

[Brain357]

I did but you're an extremist who isn't going to accept anything I say.

cause you haven't said anything. you think you can monitor private sales! and you don't know they already do background checks. hmmmm what else you got?

Seller is responsible if gun sold is used in a crime. That will fix that.

that exists today friend. you got to find something new. go

So how is the seller to our most recent TX mass shooter being prosecuted?

is it in court yet?

It doesn’t exist. He’s not being prosecuted. Your lies are tiring.

 

[HappyJoy]

Not for all sales so....try to keep up.

yep, background checks exist today.

Not for private sales.

that's outside governance, you'll never control that, explain how you stop a somebody, you have no idea exists?

I doubt every background check would be performed. However if you sell a gun to someone and that person is arrested with the gun and tells the cops who they bought it from and whether a background check were performed then the seller could be in trouble. Plus, most people will want to follow the law and do their due diligence to ensure they aren't selling to someone who shouldn't have one.

if you buy a gun from a dealer a background check is done, PERIOD!!! you believe the leftists too much.

Yes, from a dealer, we're talking about private sellers. How many times does this have to be explained to you?

 

[Vastator]

Already did, which you failed address.
So now we're back to your pending explanation as how and why, if 80-90% of the people -actually- agree with you, you don't you have what you want now.

80-90% do and I provided multiple polls to back me up. Also a link to a bill the house passed that would make background checks mandatory for all sales. The only reason it's not up for a vote is because Mitch won't put it up. What more do you want?

Here's a poll for you:

From 11/08/2016:

Punk. How accurate is/was it, hmm?

Mary, not only did you not know who was in charge of the DOJ, your retarded ass also does not know what a poll is.

what is a poll, a sample of 100 out of 330 million, and then you get to say 80 to 90%?

More than 100. Polls work, they've proven to be accurate and it's much better than the nothing you have.

Yeah we saw that last election...

 

[jc456]

At all. I know.
Why does the fact you cannot demonstrate its necessity or efficacy of a restriction not in any way prevent you from supporting it?

I did but you're an extremist who isn't going to accept anything I say.

cause you haven't said anything. you think you can monitor private sales! and you don't know they already do background checks. hmmmm what else you got?

Seller is responsible if gun sold is used in a crime. That will fix that.

Can't put them in jail, and shouldn't but sure, a state can put fines on things like improper storage, illegal sale, loaning to a person who couldn't pass a check, etc.

Why not put them in jail?

well if you did that, then every official that had contact with the dude in Florida at Parkland should be in jail, right? I mean they scrubbed his history, arrested him like thirty times. And instead of going after them you want to take the 99% of joe blows guns. too fking funny. you're so irrational there's no ability to discuss topics of such complexity with you

 

[Marion Morrison]

At all. I know.
Why does the fact you cannot demonstrate its necessity or efficacy of a restriction not in any way prevent you from supporting it?

I did but you're an extremist who isn't going to accept anything I say.

cause you haven't said anything. you think you can monitor private sales! and you don't know they already do background checks. hmmmm what else you got?

Seller is responsible if gun sold is used in a crime. That will fix that.

Can't put them in jail, and shouldn't but sure, a state can put fines on things like improper storage, illegal sale, loaning to a person who couldn't pass a check, etc.

Why not put them in jail?

Why not hang you for being a traitor?

You are going against the 2nd amendment of the Constitution, after all.

 

[HappyJoy]

Not for all sales so....try to keep up.

yep, background checks exist today.

Not for private sales.

that's outside governance, you'll never control that, explain how you stop a somebody, you have no idea exists?

I doubt every background check would be performed. However if you sell a gun to someone and that person is arrested with the gun and tells the cops who they bought it from and whether a background check were performed then the seller could be in trouble. Plus, most people will want to follow the law and do their due diligence to ensure they aren't selling to someone who shouldn't have one.

**** off, you communist turd, k? I have guns from both World Wars. Go **** yourself with your inane commie gun registration bullshit.

This is America, K? Just in case you didn't comprehend that: This is America, *****!

We're talking about background checks not registration and I don't care what you are pointing at your head at 2:00am.