Want universal background checks? A question....

[jon_berzerk]

No I've never been to a gun show.

Are all the sellers at the gun shows dealers or are there private sales going on too?

If the background check for gun shows isn't needed then what's your problem? Why are you upset about it if the loophole has been closed? Which I don't believe it has been.

You and people like you are all up in arms about something that you claim isn't needed and is happening already. If it is, then why are you upset?

I am simply pointing out that folks like yourself are calling for laws with no clue as to what existing laws are in place. You posted that in WA BGC is not run at gun shows and as a result your calling for BGC at gun shows. I pointed out how asinine that was as it is already federal law

More evidence that your gun show loophole is a myth pushed out by an anti gun loon media and swallowed up by the sheeple without any questions

amazing really

 

[jon_berzerk]

Can you tell all of us when anyone has confiscated a gun from a law abiding citizen?

Katrina

there are numerous examples of confiscation


even more throughout history world wide

of which many registration =confiscation

ended with not so good of results for those

who had their guns confiscated

 

[jon_berzerk]

I just wonder what all these right wingers will do if that ballot initiative in Washington passes by a vote of the people.

I guess it depends on which initiative you are talking about. There are two separate up for vote. One requiring BGC on private transfers and one that would forbid any requirements above Fed law. It is possible that both could actually pass as it's not either or but separate measures. State law makers would then have a mess on their hands

However to answer you question, the vote will not effect me in the slightest either way as I don't reside there.
That's the good thing about the US if you don't like the law you can move.

With the amount of lib loons in the higher populated areas I would not be surprised to see them vote for BGC on private transfers. My guess is most would actually be like you and vote without actually knowing what the law means or what the current law is.

indeed

 

[MXdad]

No I've never been to a gun show.

Are all the sellers at the gun shows dealers or are there private sales going on too?

If the background check for gun shows isn't needed then what's your problem? Why are you upset about it if the loophole has been closed? Which I don't believe it has been.

You and people like you are all up in arms about something that you claim isn't needed and is happening already. If it is, then why are you upset?

I am simply pointing out that folks like yourself are calling for laws with no clue as to what existing laws are in place. You posted that in WA BGC is not run at gun shows and as a result your calling for BGC at gun shows. I pointed out how asinine that was as it is already federal law

More evidence that your gun show loophole is a myth pushed out by an anti gun loon media and swallowed up by the sheeple without any questions

amazing really

Amazing yet sad at the same time in that these folks vote.

This was a perfect case study

Poster advocating for BGC but not really understanding the issue. Advocating for BGC at gun shows the proceeding to explain to me that at gun shows in her/his state no BGC is run at gun shows. Even going as far as to link to a misleading article and thinking it proves there are no BGC at gun shows

It's sad that folks this uninformed on issues still vote when they are clueless

 

[MXdad]

Can you tell all of us when anyone has confiscated a gun from a law abiding citizen?

Katrina

there are numerous examples of confiscation


even more throughout history world wide

of which many registration =confiscation

ended with not so good of results for those

who had their guns confiscated

Asked the Native Americans how things went when the Gov took their gun. Not a pretty picture

I guess for many of the Anti Gun Nutters they feel a disarmed populace is easier to control

 

[Dana7360]

I just wonder what all these right wingers will do if that ballot initiative in Washington passes by a vote of the people.

It wont.
Gun control is the most dead political issue f our time. It is a complete failure and only someone in denial could think the typical gun control measures passed will do anything to reduce crime by any amount.
The results of such measures have led to successful recalls in Colorado and the movement of businesses like Beretta from MD to TN.

Then you need to read the polls.

72% of likely voters will vote YES to I 594.

Washington state isn't Colorado.

 

[Dana7360]

I just wonder what all these right wingers will do if that ballot initiative in Washington passes by a vote of the people.

I guess it depends on which initiative you are talking about. There are two separate up for vote. One requiring BGC on private transfers and one that would forbid any requirements above Fed law. It is possible that both could actually pass as it's not either or but separate measures. State law makers would then have a mess on their hands

However to answer you question, the vote will not effect me in the slightest either way as I don't reside there.
That's the good thing about the US if you don't like the law you can move.

With the amount of lib loons in the higher populated areas I would not be surprised to see them vote for BGC on private transfers. My guess is most would actually be like you and vote without actually knowing what the law means or what the current law is.

Yes there's two gun initiatives on the ballot this year. Yes if both pass there will be a problem with trying to reconcile the two.

I just did a search on support for both initiatives.

I 594 for background checks 72% of likely voters will vote for it.

I 591 has 55% of likely voters to vote for it.


So it looks like there just might be some problem with these ballot initiatives.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Want universal background checks? A question....

Want universal speed limits? A question...

If you support imposing universal speed limits on all highways, whether streets or interstates, I have a question for you.

Say I meet up with Turtledude; he and I go drag racing (speeding) late at night on a secluded highway, get a beer, and go home.

How does the government prove that we were drag racing (speeding) before we got a beer and went home?

Simply because you and likely TD would do it again and again, soon one of you would be killed, kill someone else or destroy property. LE is not precient as to time and place, but facts are collected, analyzed and used to develop plans of action.

You've proved you believe you're smarter than 'the law', prisons are filled with others who held that same belief.

 

[The Rabbi]

Want universal background checks? A question....

Want universal speed limits? A question...

If you support imposing universal speed limits on all highways, whether streets or interstates, I have a question for you.

Say I meet up with Turtledude; he and I go drag racing (speeding) late at night on a secluded highway, get a beer, and go home.

How does the government prove that we were drag racing (speeding) before we got a beer and went home?

Simply because you and likely TD would do it again and again, soon one of you would be killed, kill someone else or destroy property. LE is not precient as to time and place, but facts are collected, analyzed and used to develop plans of action.

You've proved you believe you're smarter than 'the law', prisons are filled with others who held that same belief.

The only reason prisons are filled with people is because criminals are dumber than LE. That's not saying a lot btw.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If you support imposing universal background checks on all gun sales, whether through a dealer or not, I have a question for you.

Say I meet up with Turtledude; he and I buy a gun off each other, get a beer, and go home.

How does the government prove that background checks were not run before we sold the guns?

Because they will legislate it and require proofs.

If you don't have the proofs when or if you're checked out... well you get it.

Again, you would have to prove you acquired the gun after UBCs were mandated. And good luck with that.
It also puts the burden of proof on the gun owner, which is not how criminal law works.

There's no good luck since the burden of proof is on the gun owner.

The burden of proof is on the state. Always.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Want universal background checks? A question....

Want universal speed limits? A question...

If you support imposing universal speed limits on all highways, whether streets or interstates, I have a question for you.

Say I meet up with Turtledude; he and I go drag racing (speeding) late at night on a secluded highway, get a beer, and go home.

How does the government prove that we were drag racing (speeding) before we got a beer and went home?

I see you don't have an answer to the question.
No real surprise there.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Keep in mind, gun nutters are paranoid as hell. They hear government "database" and they freak out.

It's called the NICS -- which should be tied to all state level courts issuing restraining orders and domestic violence convictions. We should not rely on states to report their wife-beaters, drunks, addicts, and stalkers.

This should be instant--court reporters enter a conviction or judges order and bam!-- are are banned from buying guns or ammo ANYWHERE. If someone sells to you, they go to jail.

I see that you also do not have an answer to the question.

 

[Ropey]

Then you're worried about nothing if you think it can'tbe legislated.

Right? It cant happen then.

So, it'sjust much ado about nothing, right?

Oh, but then there's RvW.

You don't see the legislative connection between the two, then.

@The Rabbi

 

[M14 Shooter]

If you support imposing universal background checks on all gun sales, whether through a dealer or not, I have a question for you.

Say I meet up with Turtledude; he and I buy a gun off each other, get a beer, and go home.

How does the government prove that background checks were not run before we sold the guns?

Because they will legislate it and require proofs.
If you don't have the proofs when or if you're checked out... well you get it.

How does the state prove the sale was made?
How does the state prove either of us ever owned the guns we sold?
How does the state prove the guns were sold after the BGC was required?

When it's legislated, you will see how they go about it and the States will have to follow just like they have to give it up for Roe vs Wade.
No one expected that to be legislated either. Certainly the burden of option was on the State as well....
...yet the Supreme Court accepted the legislation.

So... did you want to at least try to answer the questions?

 

[Ropey]

If you support imposing universal background checks on all gun sales, whether through a dealer or not, I have a question for you.

Say I meet up with Turtledude; he and I buy a gun off each other, get a beer, and go home.

How does the government prove that background checks were not run before we sold the guns?

Because they will legislate it and require proofs.
If you don't have the proofs when or if you're checked out... well you get it.

How does the state prove the sale was made?
How does the state prove either of us ever owned the guns we sold?
How does the state prove the guns were sold after the BGC was required?

When it's legislated, you will see how they go about it and the States will have to follow just like they have to give it up for Roe vs Wade.
No one expected that to be legislated either. Certainly the burden of option was on the State as well....
...yet the Supreme Court accepted the legislation.

So... did you want to at least try to answer the questions?

Do you know what legislation means? It means creating laws.

You're saying that the current laws don't fit the possibility of legislation to change them and that's your standing argument here.

I'm saying Roe v Wade shows you to be wrong and that State's laws of personal choice are now in the hands of the Federale's.

Before R v W. I would have agreed with you.

Now? Not so much.

 

[M14 Shooter]

So... did you want to at least try to answer the questions?

Do you know what legislation means? It means creating laws.
You're saying that the current laws don't fit the possibility of legislation to change them?
I'm saying Roe v Wade shows you to be wrong.

I'm sorry -- I thought you understood the questions. My bad.

 

[Ropey]

Sheesh!

Yes, your bad.

 

[Lakhota]

The gun nutters are much more interested in whining about how universal background checks can't work than they are interested in how they can work.

It's just like Joe Scarborough said: MSNBC's Scarborough: Extremism From The Survivalist Wing Of The NRA Is The Greatest Danger To Gun Rights

 

[Lakhota]

Of course new gun laws won’t stop all violence, says Michael Tomasky. But they’re still a good idea.

The Gun Lobby's Dumbest Argument - The Daily Beast

Universal background checks would only be a minor inconvenience to gun nutters. Speed limits don't stop all speeders, but they sure help to make our roads safer than they would be without them - especially when backed up by enforcement (radar/cameras/cops/courts/DMV).

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

I don't just want universal back ground checks, I DEMAND them.

I think that every person who wishes to have kids should have to prove that they are able to raise such kids emotionally, physically,mentally, and financially.

If you don't pass the background check it is a FELONY to have kids.