background checks

[corlini]

I think they are unfair personally.

 

[ttwtt78640]

I think they are unfair personally.

They are no more "unfair" than requiring positive ID when one registers to vote.

They can be done reasonably well by simply doing them only when any valid, state issued, photo ID is issued/renewed/updated. If the adult, US citizen, applicant passes the NICS database check then simply stamp the ID "GUN OK". If the person holding a "GUN OK" ID is later convicted of a crime, placed under a judicial protection order or is adjudged mentally incompetent, then take that ID away and update the NICS database. What many now propose is to force the NICS check to be done each time a gun or ammo is purchased/transfered, but that is very expensive and totally ineffective if the gun/ammo is later obtained through other than a FFL dealer.

 

[CRUE CAB]

They are no more "unfair" than requiring positive ID when one registers to vote.

They can be done reasonably well by simply doing them only when any valid, state issued, photo ID is issued/renewed/updated. If the adult, US citizen, applicant passes the NICS database check then simply stamp the ID "GUN OK". If the person holding a "GUN OK" ID is later convicted of a crime, placed under a judicial protection order or is adjudged mentally incompetent, then take that ID away and update the NICS database. What many now propose is to force the NICS check to be done each time a gun or ammo is purchased/transfered, but that is very expensive and totally ineffective if the gun/ammo is later obtained through other than a FFL dealer.

Actually its assuming that everyone buying a gun is a criminal.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Actually its assuming that everyone buying a gun is a criminal.

No more than assuming everyone registering to vote is ineligible.

 

[CRUE CAB]

No more than assuming everyone registering to vote is ineligible.

Registering to vote is to make sure its one man one vote.
Back ground checks do nothing. So many guns are in existence that it really doesnt matter.

 

[Goshin]

I don't especially like it, and I don't think it actually has any substantial impact on crime... but I can live with it as a compromise if it makes the sheeple feel safer, I suppose.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Registering to vote is to make sure its one man one vote.
Back ground checks do nothing. So many guns are in existence that it really doesnt matter.

If it is as simple as any LEO, store clerk or private gun/ammo seller asking to see a valid, state issued, "GUN OK" photo ID to ensure that the person is legally able to keep/bear arms (or even ammo) that helps everyone rest easier - does it not? I would rather have that system than national gun registration or forcing all "legal" gun transfers to go through a FFL dealer at $25 (or more) per transfer.

 

[CRUE CAB]

I don't especially like it, and I don't think it actually has any substantial impact on crime... but I can live with it as a compromise if it makes the sheeple feel safer, I suppose.

Thousands of people fail the background check, and they do almost no follow up on those people. You tell me, what is it helping.

 

[Goshin]

Thousands of people fail the background check, and they do almost no follow up on those people. You tell me, what is it helping.

oh I know. Very little, obvious to anyone that does any checking on how very little is ever done about those who try to slip thru and fail. But the sheeple like it and it keeps them quiet mostly.

 

[TurtleDude]

oh I know. Very little, obvious to anyone that does any checking on how very little is ever done about those who try to slip thru and fail. But the sheeple like it and it keeps them quiet mostly.

sheeple and some foxes!

 

[Guy Incognito]

They are no more "unfair" than requiring positive ID when one registers to vote.

They can be done reasonably well by simply doing them only when any valid, state issued, photo ID is issued/renewed/updated. If the adult, US citizen, applicant passes the NICS database check then simply stamp the ID "GUN OK". If the person holding a "GUN OK" ID is later convicted of a crime, placed under a judicial protection order or is adjudged mentally incompetent, then take that ID away and update the NICS database. What many now propose is to force the NICS check to be done each time a gun or ammo is purchased/transfered, but that is very expensive and totally ineffective if the gun/ammo is later obtained through other than a FFL dealer.

Yes, both gun background checks and voter IDs are unfair: you should not be required to jump through hoops to exercise a fundamental right.

 

[Dragonfly]

Awwww..............boo hoo.

"Unfair" ?????

What if anything in life is "fair"?

Where is it stated things must be "fair".

This is the kind of cry-baby nonsense that makes many people look like idiots.


Should we just assume that anyone who wants to vote is eligible and not check?
Should we just assume that anyone buying alcohol is "of age" and not check?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Yes, both gun background checks and voter IDs are unfair: you should not be required to jump through hoops to exercise a fundamental right.

Simply providing proof of identity/residency is not jumping through a hoop, but (at least partial) protection from a person maintaining multiple identities/aliases or allowing minors/non-citizens to pose as adult US citizens. You have a right to vote, yet that right is limitted to voting only as yourself, only in your district/state of residency and only once in any given election. You have a right to keep and bear arms but that right may be restricted based on certain criminal conviction(s), a judicial order of restraint having been issued or having been adjudged as mentally incompetent after due process of law.

 

[Guy Incognito]

Simply providing proof of identity/residency is not jumping through a hoop, but (at least partial) protection from a person maintaining multiple identities/aliases or allowing minors/non-citizens to pose as adult US citizens. You have a right to vote, yet that right is limitted to voting only as yourself, only in your district/state of residency and only once in any given election. You have a right to keep and bear arms but that right may be restricted based on certain criminal conviction(s), a judicial order of restraint having been issued or having been adjudged as mentally incompetent after due process of law.

Those two things are not mutually exclusive. IDs may provide some protection against fraud but they are also an unjustifiable restriction on the fundamental right to vote. Likewise background checks are an unjustifiable restriction on the right to property.

 

[CRUE CAB]

Awwww..............boo hoo.

"Unfair" ?????

What if anything in life is "fair"?

Where is it stated things must be "fair".

This is the kind of cry-baby nonsense that makes many people look like idiots.


Should we just assume that anyone who wants to vote is eligible and not check?
Should we just assume that anyone buying alcohol is "of age" and not check?

Show an ID as proof of age is one thing. Calling a "hot line" to check you out is a total different thing.
Voting is one man one vote, and there is a reason to make sure its you, from your address, in your district or precint.

 

[Dragonfly]

Show an ID as proof of age is one thing. Calling a "hot line" to check you out is a total different thing.
Voting is one man one vote, and there is a reason to make sure its you, from your address, in your district or precint.

So in your mind, we should just assume all people are honest, innocent, and trustworthy?

Should there be metal detectors and check points for people and luggage before boarding airplanes?

 

[CanadaJohn]

I think they are unfair personally.

Background checks, in and of themselves, are not particularly unfair. The unfairness or inconsistency comes in when states and the federal government require background checks for some things but not others.

It is unfair in some jurisdictions to require a background check to exercise one constitutional right - the right to purchase a gun - but not require a background check to exercise another constitutional right - the right to vote in an election.

Considering that a vote, similar to the election of Obama, can have adverse affects on many people's lives, far more so than the average person's purchase of a gun, it should be even more consequential to ensure that a person voting has the actual right to do so.

Maybe you can strike a bargain - for every jurisdiction, if you require a background check to do one, you need a background check to do the other - or - if you don't need a background check for one, you don't need a background check to do the other - seems fair to me.

 

[Texmex]

The government has no right to interfere in private transactions between a citizen and the selling of his personal merchandise.

 

[CRUE CAB]

So in your mind, we should just assume all people are honest, innocent, and trustworthy?

Should there be metal detectors and check points for people and luggage before boarding airplanes?

Those who are willing to lose freedom to gain safety deserve neither.
That said, show me one crime that was not commited by a background check or a waiting period.

 

[Dragonfly]

How does a background check subtract from your freedom?

Answer: It doesn't.

It's a minor inconvenience and nothing more.

 

[SMTA]

Awwww..............boo hoo.

"Unfair" ?????

What if anything in life is "fair"?

Where is it stated things must be "fair".

This is the kind of cry-baby nonsense that makes many people look like idiots.


Should we just assume that anyone who wants to vote is eligible and not check?
Should we just assume that anyone buying alcohol is "of age" and not check?

Unlike you, some of us are responsible human beings who do not need to be constantly ruled.

 

[Dragonfly]

Unlike you, some of us are responsible human beings who do not need to be constantly ruled.

Unlike me? What in hell's bells are you actually referring to?

So you think anybody off the street should be able to walk into any store that sells guns, and buy a gun, with little to no more effort than the same anybody should be able to walk into a 7-11 and buy a slurpee?

 

[CRUE CAB]

Unlike me? What in hell's bells are you actually referring to?

So you think anybody off the street should be able to walk into any store that sells guns, and buy a gun, with little to no more effort than the same anybody should be able to walk into a 7-11 and buy a slurpee?

ID for proper age. Period.

 

[CRUE CAB]

How does a background check subtract from your freedom?

Answer: It doesn't.

It's a minor inconvenience and nothing more.

How many guns do you own?

 

[Dragonfly]

How many guns do you own?

One rifle, two shotguns, three pistols.

Why?