PDA

View Full Version : So who is Against Background Checks for Gun Buyers?



Cigar
01-10-2013, 01:25 PM
Really ... are there any Law abiding citizens worried about a Background Check?

Vice President Biden said Thursday he sees an emerging consensus around universal background checks for all gun buyers and a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines as he completes the Obama administration's broad study of gun laws. Biden said he would give President Obama recommendations by Tuesday.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-consensus-emerging-on-gun-safety-plans-to-deliver-recommendations-to-obama-by-tuesday/2013/01/10/59ecf6ee-5b4e-11e2-b8b2-0d18a64c8dfa_story.html?hpid=z1

Chris
01-10-2013, 01:26 PM
I'm guessing criminals are against them.

Cigar
01-10-2013, 01:30 PM
I'm guessing criminals are against them.


I'm guessing that don't like them either.

So you agree ... Background Checks are no big deal?

Mister D
01-10-2013, 01:34 PM
I'm guessing that don't like them either.

So you agree ... Background Checks are no big deal?

I've gotten a background check every single time I've purchased a weapon. Even when I purchased a 1866 Chassepot.

Mister D
01-10-2013, 01:35 PM
Symbolism. No substance.

Cigar
01-10-2013, 01:37 PM
Good ... so we all agree, Background Checks isn't a show stopper ...

See ... we can agree on some things.

Chris
01-10-2013, 01:38 PM
I'm guessing that don't like them either.

So you agree ... Background Checks are no big deal?

Yes, ineffectively so.

Mister D
01-10-2013, 01:40 PM
Good ... so we all agree, Background Checks isn't a show stopper ...

See ... we can agree on some things.

Certainly wouldn't have stopped the show in CT. Symbolism. No substance.

Agravan
01-10-2013, 01:47 PM
Who has claimed they are against background checks, Goober?Just another strawman from the idiot party (dems).

Cigar
01-10-2013, 01:50 PM
Who has claimed they are against background checks, Goober?Just another strawman from the idiot party (dems).

Problem reading again?

Maybe MD can help you in your reading comprehension

hanger4
01-10-2013, 01:53 PM
Really ... are there any Law abiding citizens worried about a Background Check?

Vice President Biden said Thursday he sees an emerging consensus around universal background checks for all gun buyers and a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines as he completes the Obama administration's broad study of gun laws. Biden said he would give President Obama recommendations by Tuesday.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-consensus-emerging-on-gun-safety-plans-to-deliver-recommendations-to-obama-by-tuesday/2013/01/10/59ecf6ee-5b4e-11e2-b8b2-0d18a64c8dfa_story.html?hpid=z1

Would background checks have stopped the Sandy Hook killings ??

Mister D
01-10-2013, 01:55 PM
Would background checks have stopped the Sandy Hook killings ??


Nope. You have one set of people who are somewhat distraught and feel the need to do something even if it wouldn't have made any impact on the shooting in CT. You have another who know damn well it's pure symbolism but refuse to waste a juicy tragedy.

Cigar
01-10-2013, 01:57 PM
Would background checks have stopped the Sandy Hook killings ??



I don't ... do you know the background of Adam Lanza or his mother?

Agravan
01-10-2013, 02:11 PM
Problem reading again?Maybe MD can help you in your reading comprehensionImplied by the title of the OP, Goober. Do you really just post without reading or understanding your posts?

keymanjim
01-10-2013, 02:14 PM
They didn't do a background check on obama before they turned our nuclear arsenal over to him. Why should I have to get one for a handgun?

Agravan
01-10-2013, 02:15 PM
I don't ... do you know the background of Adam Lanza or his mother?His mother went thru background checks to purchase the weapons. No amount of background checking would have stopped Adam since he kiled his mother and stole the weapons.Or are you advocating background checks for every single (law abiding) American?

Cigar
01-10-2013, 02:16 PM
Implied by the title of the OP, Goober. Do you really just post without reading or understanding your posts?

Yea stupid, asking a question doesn't imply that you said anything.

Cigar
01-10-2013, 02:17 PM
They didn't do a background check on obama before they turned our nuclear arsenal over to him. Why should I have to get one for a handgun?


Link?

Agravan
01-10-2013, 02:17 PM
Yea stupid, asking a question doesn't imply that you said anything.Hey moron, asking the question implies that there are people who are against background checks in this forum.

Cigar
01-10-2013, 02:18 PM
His mother went thru background checks to purchase the weapons. No amount of background checking would have stopped Adam since he kiled his mother and stole the weapons.Or are you advocating background checks for every single (law abiding) American?

The Question is; Who is against Background Checks?

Or are you having problems understanding the question?

Agravan
01-10-2013, 02:22 PM
The Question is; Who is against Background Checks?Or are you having problems understanding the question?Well Goober, the question I reponded to was this:
I don't ... do you know the background of Adam Lanza or his mother?Or do you not have the capability to follow a thread of discussion?

Cigar
01-10-2013, 02:24 PM
Well Goober, the question I reponded to was this:Or do you not have the capability to follow a thread of discussion?



Ok ... so I'll have to believe you personally read the background check of Adam Mother.

keymanjim
01-10-2013, 02:25 PM
Link?
Link to a background check that didn't happen?
What's next? Divide by zero?

Mister D
01-10-2013, 02:25 PM
Ok ... so I'll have to believe you personally read the background check of Adam Mother.

She lived in NJ. She had to jump through hoops. trust me. I know.

Cigar
01-10-2013, 02:27 PM
Link to a background check that didn't happen?
What's next? Divide by zero?



Link to where there's proof that no background check was done.

Are you saying ... President Obama out smarted everyone?

Agravan
01-10-2013, 02:33 PM
Ok ... so I'll have to believe you personally read the background check of Adam Mother.
Yet more proof that your being a gun owner is bullsh*t.
No one can legally buy a firearm anywhere in the US without a background check.

Connecticut Shooter Adam Lanza's Guns Were Registered To Mother Nancy Lanza: Official

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/15/connecticut-shooter-guns_n_2306913.html

hanger4
01-10-2013, 02:38 PM
I don't ... do you know the background of Adam Lanza or his mother?

Connecticut requires the checks.

Adam Lanza is irrelevant, he stole the guns.

Agravan
01-10-2013, 02:45 PM
Connecticut requires the checks.

Adam Lanza is irrelevant, he stole the guns.
Maybe what Cigar is suggesting is that if someone is planning to steal a gun, he must first go thru a background check before he murders the owner and steals their guns.

keymanjim
01-10-2013, 02:53 PM
Link to where there's proof that no background check was done.

Are you saying ... President Obama out smarted everyone?
It's pretty much axiomatic. I mean, who would accept him with his past acquaintances?

Cigar
01-10-2013, 02:54 PM
Maybe what Cigar is suggesting is that if someone is planning to steal a gun, he must first go thru a background check before he murders the owner and steals their guns.



Naaa ... just find someone stupid enough to leave them unsecured.

Agravan
01-10-2013, 03:01 PM
Naaa ... just find someone stupid enough to leave them unsecured.

This response is yet another off-topic dodge by Cigar.
The kind he typically uses when he paints himself into a corner.

patrickt
01-10-2013, 03:16 PM
Who's against background checks? Well, President Obama is for members of his administration and appointees to the NLRB. For buying guns, I don't know anyone who is against background as long as they aren't like national health care where your cancer treatment starts six months after you die.

Of course, we do have liberals fighting for the privacy rights of pedophiles, convicted felons, and the mentally ill so I don't know what the background check will cover.

hanger4
01-10-2013, 05:03 PM
Naaa ... just find someone stupid enough to leave them unsecured.

And know this how ??

Uncle Slam
01-10-2013, 05:16 PM
I say if their Zippity Boom pill blood level is normal, hand them a gun! Xanax and Winchester go well together.

zelmo1234
01-10-2013, 05:17 PM
Link?

http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2012/12/14/guns-used-by-adam-lanza-were-his-mothers-legal-age-to-own-a-gun-in-connecticut-is-21-gun-laws-worthless-in-this-case/

She was the legal owner and they were registered!

Which means she had a background check

zelmo1234
01-10-2013, 05:21 PM
What we should do is stop find the people that run guns to gangs and drug lords. We should appoint a task forse to get the illegal gusn off the streets and catch the gun runners.

They cold start with this one, the biggest gun runner of them all!

https://www.google.com/search?q=picture+of+eric+holder&hl=en&tbo=u&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=0j7vUK9LiryqAd7lgTg&sqi=2&ved=0CDAQsAQ&biw=1311&bih=575

patrickt
01-10-2013, 05:25 PM
Do you think Eric Holder will quit selling guns to the drug cartels?

zelmo1234
01-10-2013, 05:44 PM
Did you click on the link? He sure will not be held accountable.

I have an Idea for the Republicans, they could pass the Assult weapons ban and have it take effect when they release all of the fast and furious documents?

Want to bet that that it would never take effect!

bladimz
01-10-2013, 06:40 PM
Yet more proof that your being a gun owner is bullsh*t.
No one can legally buy a firearm anywhere in the US without a background check.From what i understand, a guy can walk into a gun show and buy one from an unlicensed seller and walk out without a background check. And from what i understand, it's legal. True or not?

bladimz
01-10-2013, 06:40 PM
Did you click on the link? He sure will not be held accountable.

I have an Idea for the Republicans, they could pass the Assult weapons ban and have it take effect when they release all of the fast and furious documents?

Want to bet that that it would never take effect!relevance?

GrumpyDog
01-10-2013, 07:33 PM
I am opposed to registration. It serves no good purpose.

It does not prevent the violent person from using a firearm.

It creates a suspicion of the government spying on the people.

It gives information to would be criminals, who owns a gun and where they might live.

In the case of full blown attempt of a president/congress to become a tyrannical government, it makes it much easier for there to be a surprise preliminary confiscation of the citizens firearms.

The forefathers thought that the right to keep and bear arms was such a fundamental right, that they listed it 2nd only to free speech, and freedom of assembly.

If the Dems want to take this road one more time, please proceed, idiots.

About as stupid as the Reps and their "ban abortion permanently" idiots.

hanger4
01-10-2013, 07:51 PM
From what i understand, a guy can walk into a gun show and buy one from an unlicensed seller and walk out without a background check. And from what i understand, it's legal. True or not?

Not in all states. These states, California, Colorado, Illinois, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Hawaii, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, Nebraska and North Carolina (15) have closed the gun show loop hole in one fashion or another.

I'm more or less on the side of Grumpy on this, registration makes me somewhat apprehensive.

Peter1469
01-10-2013, 08:02 PM
I am for background checks that include criminal records, domestic violence, the terrorism watch lists, and reports form shrinks about mental illness.

I am not, however, for gun registration. That has been the primary tool of Statists to later confiscate guns.

countryboy
01-10-2013, 08:06 PM
I am for background checks that include criminal records, domestic violence, the terrorism watch lists, and reports form shrinks about mental illness.



I am not necessarily against that, but I am apprehensive about who will define the term "mental illness". I don't trust libs, and I never will.

Also, there are a LOT of bogus "domestic violence" charges.

Uncle Slam
01-10-2013, 08:31 PM
From what i understand, a guy can walk into a gun show and buy one from an unlicensed seller and walk out without a background check. And from what i understand, it's legal. True or not?

When I ordered my 57 cal Enfield musket to Civil War reenact, it was mail ordered and delivered UPS. No questions asked. Incidentally, my dad used it to deer hunt, so it was a reproduction, NOT a look-alike toy.

Peter1469
01-10-2013, 10:01 PM
I am not necessarily against that, but I am apprehensive about who will define the term "mental illness". I don't trust libs, and I never will.

Also, there are a LOT of bogus "domestic violence" charges.

Oh sure.

But all of the mass murders have been on the anti-psycotic drugs that are handed out like candy today- the ones with black box warnings that they may cause suicide ideations or homicidal thoughts.

Agravan
01-10-2013, 10:07 PM
I am opposed to registration. It serves no good purpose.

It does not prevent the violent person from using a firearm.

It creates a suspicion of the government spying on the people.

It gives information to would be criminals, who owns a gun and where they might live.

In the case of full blown attempt of a president/congress to become a tyrannical government, it makes it much easier for there to be a surprise preliminary confiscation of the citizens firearms.

The forefathers thought that the right to keep and bear arms was such a fundamental right, that they listed it 2nd only to free speech, and freedom of assembly.

If the Dems want to take this road one more time, please proceed, idiots.

About as stupid as the Reps and their "ban abortion permanently" idiots.

The New York Times and other liberal papers are already printing names and addresses of registered gun owners.

Peter1469
01-10-2013, 10:20 PM
The New York Times and other liberal papers are already printing names and addresses of registered gun owners.

Their gun free neighbors are probably scared.

Uncle Slam
01-11-2013, 07:34 AM
"The dead are the living in the age of the gun............" - Kerry Livgren, "Sparks of the Tempest" 1977

bladimz
01-11-2013, 01:00 PM
Not in all states. These states, California, Colorado, Illinois, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Hawaii, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, Nebraska and North Carolina (15) have closed the gun show loop hole in one fashion or another.

I'm more or less on the side of Grumpy on this, registration makes me somewhat apprehensive.That's 17 states. 17 out of 50. That's like 33%. So the fact is gun-show purchases are still legal in 33 states without background checks. This is unacceptable, i believe.

<By the way, i object to car registration, speed limits, driver's licenses, drivers tests, and VIN numbers.>

GrumpyDog
01-13-2013, 03:35 PM
The New York Times and other liberal papers are already printing names and addresses of registered gun owners.

Then they are complicite with the government, in violating the 4th amendment rights of their fellow citizens.

Exercising your 2nd amendment right, should not deprive you of your 4th amendment right to privacy.