• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

House approves bill tightening background checks on guns

Rich2018 said:
And which method of purchase would you prefer ?
If Oxy was available in supermarket pharmacies or places like CVS with no prescription ***OR*** if you had to find an unlicensed drug dealer would would sell it to you illegally ?


The same is true of guns.
If there were no background checks, or if we scrapped the ones we had and allowed just anyone to walk in a gun store and buy what they want, you'd be making it far easier for ineligible people to get guns. Consequently you could argue that more guns would into the wrong hands.


If you take the view that ineligible people will get guns anyway, you may as well legalize all drugs...
Indeed you may as well make everything legal and ban nothing.
Click to expand...
Like with so many other issues, people seek to criminalize the tool rather than the behavior.

Personal recreational use of drugs really doesn't mess up too much stuff. Getting high on meth and robbing a 7-11, however, creates a situation that has a negative impact on the community. The meth isn't so much the issue. The robbery is the issue. Because of thngs like this we have enhanced penalties under the law for criminal behavior committed while under the influence of drugs. Likewise, we have enhanced penalties for crimes committed with a firearm. This is the right way to deal with crime because it addresses the behavior rather than the tool used in conjunction with the behavior. For example, nobody calls for banning hammers when looters run around a city smashing windows. If, however, the looters ran around shooting out windows the media would be up in arms.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
So you think there should be no regulation of any kind and violent felons should be able to buy guns at Wal Mart. Luckily this is a nutty fringe opinion that won't happen.
Click to expand...
Yeah.. thats a lie. Stop the BS man.
 
Aunt Antifa said:
No; it’s not. No matter how much you whine about it.

Guns is serious business.
Click to expand...
No.. guns aren't serious business.. peoples behavior is serious business.
Sweet baby jesus you democrats just never learn.
So.. you just win the Presidency and congress almost as narrowly as can be. And you just managed to pass much needed legislation on covid relief.
Everything that should help keep TRump and company from coming back.
And then you go and blow it with passing a gun control bill that will do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.. to stop crime.. or criminal behavior..and all it will do is create a major inconvenience to me and all other law abiding gun owners.
And in doing so.. you are going to alienate every independent and blue dog democrat in all the swing states..and Trump or a Trump surrogate will win the next election.
Oh.. after you lose the house and the senate in 2 years.
You just cant help touching the third rail.. can you?
 
Lutherf said:
Like with so many other issues, people seek to criminalize the tool rather than the behavior.
Click to expand...

What other issues ?


Personal recreational use of drugs really doesn't mess up too much stuff.
Click to expand...

DUI ?

Are you really not aware of violence caused by people under the influence ? (and not just alcohol related violence)


Getting high on meth and robbing a 7-11, however, creates a situation that has a negative impact on the community. The meth isn't so much the issue. The robbery is the issue. Because of thngs like this we have enhanced penalties under the law for criminal behavior committed while under the influence of drugs. Likewise, we have enhanced penalties for crimes committed with a firearm. This is the right way to deal with crime because it addresses the behavior rather than the tool used in conjunction with the behavior. For example, nobody calls for banning hammers when looters run around a city smashing windows. If, however, the looters ran around shooting out windows the media would be up in arms.
Click to expand...

So we're no longer discussing background checks...do I take it that you concede that they serve a positive purpose and that improving the can only be a good thing ?

Yes, robbery is bad
Drugs that cause people to be likely to do it are bad
If the drugs cause people to be more likely to commit robbery, be violent or just harm themselves, then yes, those drugs are indeed and issue.
 
iguanaman said:
Umm.... because voter fraud is not a problem and gun deaths are? You might be comfortable with having the highest gun deaths per person of any western nation but others of us are not.
Click to expand...
I don't want to hijack the thread over to voter fraud, so I'll just say that all constitutional rights are created equal. You don't get to infringe on one of them because you perceive it's a problem but pass on another because you believe it's not a problem. If it's OK to require ID to buy a gun, then it's OK to require one to vote. If it's an infringement on your right to vote to charge a poll tax, it's an infringement on your right to buy a gun to charge a background check fee.

Besides none of the issues I raised would interfere with running background checks. They should be free, they should be TRULY instant, and if it's resonable to require that you prove your citizenship to buy a gun, then it's perfectly reasonable to require that you prove your citizenship to vote.
 
natman said:
I don't want to hijack the thread over to voter fraud, so I'll just say that all constitutional rights are created equal. You don't get to infringe on one of them because you perceive it's a problem but pass on another because you believe it's not a problem. If it's OK to require ID to buy a gun, then it's OK to require one to vote. If it's an infringement on your right to vote to charge a poll tax, it's an infringement on your right to buy a gun to charge a background check fee.

Besides none of the issues I raised would interfere with running background checks. They should be free, they should be TRULY instant, and if it's resonable to require that you prove your citizenship to buy a gun, then it's perfectly reasonable to require that you prove your citizenship to vote.
Click to expand...
Actually the right to vote is more important because it is the basis for our form of Govt. Gun owners overrate their importance of course. There are huge costs associated with having so many guns in circulation and it makes sense that gun owners should help defray them. It's not like America would end without them either. Plenty of democracies do quite well with far fewer guns in circulation. As far as voter ID laws, they are now virtually nationwide and according to most Republicans all they have done is make our elections less safe. What a waste huh?
 
Last edited:
natman said:
I don't want to hijack the thread over to voter fraud, so I'll just say that all constitutional rights are created equal. You don't get to infringe on one of them because you perceive it's a problem but pass on another because you believe it's not a problem. If it's OK to require ID to buy a gun, then it's OK to require one to vote. If it's an infringement on your right to vote to charge a poll tax, it's an infringement on your right to buy a gun to charge a background check fee.

Besides none of the issues I raised would interfere with running background checks. They should be free, they should be TRULY instant, and if it's resonable to require that you prove your citizenship to buy a gun, then it's perfectly reasonable to require that you prove your citizenship to vote.
Click to expand...

How can it be an infringement on your right to own a gun, by asking you to demonstrate that you do actually have that right ?

Asking for ID to vote is not the same, the consequences of letting someone vote, who is not entitled to, is not the same as letter a prohibited person have a gun
Moreover, if more than one person votes under the name of citizen X, voter fraud is easy to identity, trace and prosecute.
 
Lutherf said:
The people you're talking about are already prohibited from owning firearms. A background check doesn't change that.
Click to expand...
They don’t get that that’s what you’re talking about.

The law won’t have any effect on those who were already ineligible and didn’t follow existing laws.

I am onboard for closing the Charleston loophole though. On those rare occasions when NICS doesn’t come through in minutes, the purchaser can wait.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
They don’t get that that’s what you’re talking about.

The law won’t have any effect on those who were already ineligible and didn’t follow existing laws.

I am onboard for closing the Charleston loophole though. On those rare occasions when NICS doesn’t come through in minutes, the purchaser can wait.
Click to expand...

Changes to background checks are proposed to close loopholes where an ineligible person might be able to buy a gun openly.
 
Dare I say facial recognition alongside?
Heck, why not stir it up a tad?
 
Lovebug said:
Dare I say facial recognition alongside?
Heck, why not stir it up a tad?
Click to expand...

Issuing a photo license to own a gun isn't the world worst idea....gun owners would hate it though, but it would have many benefits.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
They don’t get that that’s what you’re talking about.

The law won’t have any effect on those who were already ineligible and didn’t follow existing laws.

I am onboard for closing the Charleston loophole though. On those rare occasions when NICS doesn’t come through in minutes, the purchaser can wait.
Click to expand...
what should be the ramification if someone is killed while waiting delivery and they should have been giving a proceed immediately? should the person who screwed up the checks be civilly liable? criminally liable? should the government compensate the estate substantially?
 
Rich2018 said:
Oh, so a cooling off period ?
Click to expand...
anyone who actually understands criminology knows that if you go to a gun store, fill out the paperwork, undergo the background check and buy the gun, even if there is no delays, you are no longer in "the heat of the moment"
 
Rich2018 said:
Issuing a photo license to own a gun isn't the world worst idea....gun owners would hate it though, but it would have many benefits.
Click to expand...
the benefit being harassing gun owners and turning a right into a state privilege. No thanks.
 
natman said:
This is probably the least offensive of the planned Biden gun control measures, which is why it's going first.
It gives the government up to ten days to return the result. The background check system is called NICS, for National Instant Check System. Only a true federal bureaucrat would consider ten days "Instant". There will be a fee for each check. California has already proven that this fee will go up. In California, you have to have a RealID or equivalent to buy a gun, since your citizenship status is an important factor.

If all of these are "reasonable" restrictions on your constitutional right to buy a firearm, why are similar measures not reasonable when applied to voting? Would you accept having to pay a fee to vote? Would you accept having to show proof of citizenship, since citizenship is a requirement to vote? Would you accept having to register at least 10 days in advance? Judging from posts on this forum, for most of those who call for gun control, the answer to all of these would be NO. So how come similar restrictions are OK for some constitutional rights but not for others?
Click to expand...

IMO there is no such thing as "reasonable restrictions" on a right identified in our founding Constitution as "shall not be infringed."

IMO only those people who have temporarily or permanently (i.e. depending on if they were sentenced to Life Imprisonment, or merely Imprisonment for a term of years) ceased to be "free" citizens can have such rights removed while they are no longer "free."

Now we can go round and round as to what a "reasonable person" would consider "arms," covered by this right. But IMO that would have to do with the definition of the term "arms" itself. I.e. what an individual combatant can carry for self-defense and the defense of other in his ARMS. (So no weapons platforms like tanks, jets, etc.; no Nuclear/Biological/Chemical weapons which are single use, and in no way serve a "self-defense" role; etc.).

But the drive to disarm citizens serves only ONE purpose IMHO, and that is to prevent citizens from opposing (however unlikely the outcome) government control.
 
iguanaman said:
Umm.... because voter fraud is not a problem and gun deaths are? You might be comfortable with having the highest gun deaths per person of any western nation but others of us are not.
Click to expand...
Voter fraud not a problem? Have you looked at who's in the White House lately? Just saying.
 
zsu2357 said:
Voter fraud not a problem? Have you looked at who's in the White House lately? Just saying.
Click to expand...
You mean the man that won the election by a landslide and an over 7 million vote majority? The fraudster lost big time as we all knew he would. Even the one term mistake knew he would lose and started trying to steal the election before it was even held.
 
iguanaman said:
Right because we should ignore all those preventable deaths just like with Covid 19. you guys are really in a death cult.
Click to expand...
All those preventable deaths like covid 19? Sorry no Burger King or Mackie Ds but it's okay to be elbow to elbow at Walmart.
 
iguanaman said:
You mean the man that won the election by a landslide and an over 7 million vote majority? The fraudster lost big time as we all knew he would. Even the one term mistake knew he would lose and started trying to steal the election before it was even held.
Click to expand...
Better buckle up buttercup..because the democrats passing gun control just cost you control of the congress and the presidency.
 
zsu2357 said:
All those preventable deaths like covid 19? Sorry no Burger King or Mackie Ds but it's okay to be elbow to elbow at Walmart.
Click to expand...
Duh...when was the last time you wore a mask WHEN EATING?
gee..see the difference now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom