Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

Universal background check

mc9
Posts: 1,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 4:05:56 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 3:37:06 AM, Dilara wrote:
I agree.

Ha I don't see why people would be against it, there seems to be this notion that it would take away guns from law abiding citizens though it's purpose is to stop criminals from getting guns easily.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 3:49:09 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 3:05:54 AM, mc9 wrote:
I think we need to have a universal background check for gun purchases.

what do you think that means? give what you believe is the definition, since many in different threads what it but what they describe already is in place.
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,385
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 4:09:10 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 3:54:25 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
not sure if you have done much research but
http://www.breitbart.com...

Republican solution to that: Do nothing at all, and make it even easier.
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
kevin24018
Posts: 1,952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 4:12:37 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 4:09:10 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:54:25 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
not sure if you have done much research but
http://www.breitbart.com...

Republican solution to that: Do nothing at all, and make it even easier.

Obama and his appointees are Democrats, not sure why you bring up Republicans, seems those who do not enforce the laws and hand down slaps on the wrist are the "do nothings" of the world doesn't matter to me which party they belong to, angry much?
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 4:36:47 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 3:49:09 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:05:54 AM, mc9 wrote:
I think we need to have a universal background check for gun purchases.

what do you think that means? give what you believe is the definition, since many in different threads what it but what they describe already is in place.

Universal background means (predominantly) removing all loopholes (private sale).
kevin24018
Posts: 1,952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 5:10:51 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 4:36:47 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:49:09 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:05:54 AM, mc9 wrote:
I think we need to have a universal background check for gun purchases.

what do you think that means? give what you believe is the definition, since many in different threads what it but what they describe already is in place.

Universal background means (predominantly) removing all loopholes (private sale).

every single private sale including selling from parents to children and vise versa? what about gifting a firearm or letting someone borrow it? It's not uncommon to share firearms with other people who may have never had the opportunity to use what you have and vise versa. Someone is invited to go duck hunting but doesn't own a shot gun, there are trap/skeet and indoor ranges where you can rent guns. Need a background check for those instances?
how would it be enforced? I sell you a gun for cash in a parking lot, no receipt, you do something and get caught you then say yeah I got it from Curly Joe only that's not my name since I either didn't give you my name or a false name, or it gets sold a few times. How would this really work, how effective would it really be and how in the world do you enforce it?
Like so many things the approach is wrong imo, how about empowering and enabling people to do things on their own? Being a responsible citizen I don't want to sell to someone who shouldn't have one, criminal records are public, several states have searchable data bases. Why not consolidate and improve what already is? You make an account, when you do a voluntary search and transfer you are given $5 credit on your next FFL application (which ranges from $25-$50) For those who are going to say yeah but someone will make a fortune scamming it blah blah blah, if you can't see the point don't bother, it's more effective to make it easy for people to voluntarily do things than to try to force it on them.
Maccabee
Posts: 1,247
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 5:13:39 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 4:36:47 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:49:09 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:05:54 AM, mc9 wrote:
I think we need to have a universal background check for gun purchases.

what do you think that means? give what you believe is the definition, since many in different threads what it but what they describe already is in place.

Universal background means (predominantly) removing all loopholes (private sale).
Which is very small. It's not the main way criminals get guns. They get it by either stealing it, straw purchases, or the black market. In fact more criminals got guns from buying from a gun and pawn shops than "the loophole".
Scripture, facts, stats, and logic is how I argue

Evolutionism is a religion, not science

When seconds count, the police are just minutes away.

"If guns are the cause of crimes then aren't matches the cause of arson?" D. Boys

"If the death penalty is government sanctioned killing then isn't inprisonment is government sanction kidnapping?" D. B

"Why do you trust the government with machine guns but not honest citizens?" D. B

All those who are pro-death (abortion) is already born
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 5:15:34 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 5:13:39 PM, Maccabee wrote:
At 1/18/2016 4:36:47 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:49:09 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:05:54 AM, mc9 wrote:
I think we need to have a universal background check for gun purchases.

what do you think that means? give what you believe is the definition, since many in different threads what it but what they describe already is in place.

Universal background means (predominantly) removing all loopholes (private sale).
Which is very small. It's not the main way criminals get guns. They get it by either stealing it, straw purchases, or the black market. In fact more criminals got guns from buying from a gun and pawn shops than "the loophole".

I am simply answering the question.

Now, if we want to talk about how guns get into the black market, that is another topic altogether
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 5:23:41 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 5:10:51 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 4:36:47 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:49:09 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:05:54 AM, mc9 wrote:
I think we need to have a universal background check for gun purchases.

what do you think that means? give what you believe is the definition, since many in different threads what it but what they describe already is in place.

Universal background means (predominantly) removing all loopholes (private sale).

every single private sale including selling from parents to children and vise versa?
I think that would be included, yes.

what about gifting a firearm or letting someone borrow it?
My supposition would be that gifting would be included. Borrow? Well, I don't know.

how would it be enforced? I sell you a gun for cash in a parking lot, no receipt, you do something and get caught you then say yeah I got it from Curly Joe only that's not my name since I either didn't give you my name or a false name, or it gets sold a few times. How would this really work, how effective would it really be and how in the world do you enforce it?
That remains unseen. If all guns were inventoried, tracing the gun to the owner is primarily accomplished. In a case where you have "sold" a gun to someone without doing the background check, you and the buyer would be committing a crime.

Like so many things the approach is wrong imo, how about empowering and enabling people to do things on their own? Being a responsible citizen I don't want to sell to someone who shouldn't have one, criminal records are public, several states have searchable data bases. Why not consolidate and improve what already is? You make an account, when you do a voluntary search and transfer you are given $5 credit on your next FFL application (which ranges from $25-$50) For those who are going to say yeah but someone will make a fortune scamming it blah blah blah, if you can't see the point don't bother, it's more effective to make it easy for people to voluntarily do things than to try to force it on them.

I can see issues with this, but don't have time to properly respond. Perhaps later.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 5:40:48 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 5:23:41 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/18/2016 5:10:51 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 4:36:47 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:49:09 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:05:54 AM, mc9 wrote:
I think we need to have a universal background check for gun purchases.

what do you think that means? give what you believe is the definition, since many in different threads what it but what they describe already is in place.

Universal background means (predominantly) removing all loopholes (private sale).

every single private sale including selling from parents to children and vise versa?
I think that would be included, yes.

what about gifting a firearm or letting someone borrow it?
My supposition would be that gifting would be included. Borrow? Well, I don't know.

how would it be enforced? I sell you a gun for cash in a parking lot, no receipt, you do something and get caught you then say yeah I got it from Curly Joe only that's not my name since I either didn't give you my name or a false name, or it gets sold a few times. How would this really work, how effective would it really be and how in the world do you enforce it?
That remains unseen. If all guns were inventoried, tracing the gun to the owner is primarily accomplished. In a case where you have "sold" a gun to someone without doing the background check, you and the buyer would be committing a crime.

so you want a gun registration then. again I'm not sure tracing the gun back to the original owner is effective given the straw purchase example I posted, although they may make an example out of the guy in S.B. that will not be the norm, what of the light punishments for the straw sales as well as the criminals already flagged by the background checks that aren't arrested?

Like so many things the approach is wrong imo, how about empowering and enabling people to do things on their own? Being a responsible citizen I don't want to sell to someone who shouldn't have one, criminal records are public, several states have searchable data bases. Why not consolidate and improve what already is? You make an account, when you do a voluntary search and transfer you are given $5 credit on your next FFL application (which ranges from $25-$50) For those who are going to say yeah but someone will make a fortune scamming it blah blah blah, if you can't see the point don't bother, it's more effective to make it easy for people to voluntarily do things than to try to force it on them.

I can see issues with this, but don't have time to properly respond. Perhaps later.

sure there's issues with everything but it's a focus point, and a way to minimize push back, carrot vs stick
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 5:52:25 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 5:40:48 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 5:23:41 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/18/2016 5:10:51 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 4:36:47 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:49:09 PM, kevin24018 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:05:54 AM, mc9 wrote:
I think we need to have a universal background check for gun purchases.

what do you think that means? give what you believe is the definition, since many in different threads what it but what they describe already is in place.

Universal background means (predominantly) removing all loopholes (private sale).

every single private sale including selling from parents to children and vise versa?
I think that would be included, yes.

what about gifting a firearm or letting someone borrow it?
My supposition would be that gifting would be included. Borrow? Well, I don't know.

how would it be enforced? I sell you a gun for cash in a parking lot, no receipt, you do something and get caught you then say yeah I got it from Curly Joe only that's not my name since I either didn't give you my name or a false name, or it gets sold a few times. How would this really work, how effective would it really be and how in the world do you enforce it?
That remains unseen. If all guns were inventoried, tracing the gun to the owner is primarily accomplished. In a case where you have "sold" a gun to someone without doing the background check, you and the buyer would be committing a crime.

so you want a gun registration then. again I'm not sure tracing the gun back to the original owner is effective given the straw purchase example I posted, although they may make an example out of the guy in S.B. that will not be the norm, what of the light punishments for the straw sales as well as the criminals already flagged by the background checks that aren't arrested?

This thread has not been about what I want, it has been about answering your question. Now, would I be OK with a registration scheme? Sure. To the remainder of the points, you are ignoring the good for sake of great.


Like so many things the approach is wrong imo, how about empowering and enabling people to do things on their own? Being a responsible citizen I don't want to sell to someone who shouldn't have one, criminal records are public, several states have searchable data bases. Why not consolidate and improve what already is? You make an account, when you do a voluntary search and transfer you are given $5 credit on your next FFL application (which ranges from $25-$50) For those who are going to say yeah but someone will make a fortune scamming it blah blah blah, if you can't see the point don't bother, it's more effective to make it easy for people to voluntarily do things than to try to force it on them.

I can see issues with this, but don't have time to properly respond. Perhaps later.

sure there's issues with everything but it's a focus point, and a way to minimize push back, carrot vs stick
Like above.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 6:29:41 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 5:52:25 PM, TBR wrote:

This thread has not been about what I want, it has been about answering your question. Now, would I be OK with a registration scheme? Sure. To the remainder of the points, you are ignoring the good for sake of great.

those would argue for "the good of the sake of the great" would require more guns not less, since I have seen neither approach provide fact based arguments to show any statistical impact, and each side effectively counters the other.
again I think this is just a shiny object flashed at people to gain their attention so they don't focus on what can be done better and effectively since that never seems to be the topic political officials care to make a priority, not in any serious context or time spend working at it.
There have been 3 times that firearm sales have skyrocketed, when Obama was going to make more laws, anyone disagree? What do you think will happen with this? The black market will be a booming business. Again that's why the carrot vs stick approach makes more sense because you are just not going to stop criminals from getting them. How about we stop people from becoming criminals in the first place? And really punish those who choose to be come one.
http://cureviolence.org...
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Not sure when putting a band aide on a mortal wound became a way of doing things, but to me this is the focus of today's Society, sadly.

it's hard to understand why everyone who is so caught up and distracted by these catchphrases which only server to focus and distract away from the real sources of crime and violence.
Dilara
Posts: 661
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2016 7:28:31 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/18/2016 4:05:56 AM, mc9 wrote:
At 1/18/2016 3:37:06 AM, Dilara wrote:
I agree.

Ha I don't see why people would be against it, there seems to be this notion that it would take away guns from law abiding citizens though it's purpose is to stop criminals from getting guns easily.

Law abiding citizens who would pass the check anyways shouldn't worry about it.
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2016 3:34:15 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
I completely agree.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan