• 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!

Miami police chief calls new Texas handgun measure "ridiculous"

TurtleDude said:
When I took the test in 2004, they let you use any handgun you wanted. You'd see idiocy such as someone using a 22 target pistol with a red dot sight. I used a SIG 239 which was what I carried when I had to for the job. (like going to bad neighborhoods to interview witnesses in drug forfeiture cases). I cleaned it though I had one ten instead of an x. It was easy-back then it was shot at 7 and 3 yards. Now the US Marshal's qualification was much tougher-had to shoot up to 25 yards, one stage was "weak hand" several required reloads under a clock. I cleaned that but at one time I was shooting close to 1000 rounds a week
Click to expand...
You should've seen my instructor's jaw drop when I completely removed the little sillouette-a of a man in the upper left hand corner at 25 yds.

Honks horn that belongs to me.
 
TurtleDude said:
you said there are essentially no background checks. More than half the guns private citizens own were sold with a background check since 1993 (and that is just federally) some states require it for private sales too
Click to expand...

A safety net that works half the time means it fails all the time.

I’m sorry that you feel walls with gaps in them work. That’s just weird coming from a Trump voter
 
Rogue Valley said:
Miami police chief calls new Texas handgun measure "ridiculous"

gettyimages-842618668.jpg




Anyone can carry a gun with no background check, no training, and no carry license? That is just more GOP insanity.

Republicans pretend that they support the police, but what they actually support is granting unlimited fire-power to every criminal and mentally-challenged individual in Texas.
Click to expand...
Anyone who supports licensing or permitting a constitutionally protected individual right is a fascist and anti-American. The enemy of liberty.
 
Aunt Antifa said:
A safety net that works half the time means it fails all the time.

I’m sorry that you feel walls with gaps in them work. That’s just weird coming from a Trump voter
Click to expand...
In the 2010 report "Summary of Select Firearms Violence Prevention Strategies" the DOJ noted that “universal” background checks can’t be effective without a reduction in the illegal sources of guns to criminals and can’t be enforced without comprehensive firearm registration.

In "Source and Use of Firearms Involved in Crimes: Survey of Prison Inmates, 2016", the DOJ reported in Table 5 where criminals get their guns. We see that vast majority of guns in the hands of criminals come from straw purchases, family transfers, theft and the underground market (Illegal sources of firearms that include markets for stolen goods, middlemen for stolen goods, criminals or criminal enterprises, or individuals or groups involved in sales of illegal drug). A total of 0.8% come from gun shows. Purchases from "good guys" in private sales don't even show up.


What does a UBC do to prevent criminals from getting guns?



details

health.ucdavis.edu health.ucdavis.edu
 
MaryP said:
No background checks? I thought everyone had to have a background check when they buy a gun?
Click to expand...
Only those who hold a Federal Firearms License are required by federal law to use the NICS background check created in 1998. If they do not possess an FFL, then no background checks are required when buying or selling a firearm. All gun dealers who deal with interstate and international commerce are required to have an FFL. However, you can still buy and sell firearms from individuals who are not gun dealers and do not possess an FFL. Thus negating the federal background check requirement.
 
d0gbreath said:
You'll still get a background check. What you won't get now is a trainer to make sure that you know what you're doing with the gun.
Click to expand...
No, you will not get a background check. Only if you buy your firearms from an FFL holder.

All my firearms were purchased from individuals residing in the same State as I. I have never filled out an ATF form 4473, nor do I ever intend to.
 
Glitch said:
Only those who hold a Federal Firearms License are required by federal law to use the NICS background check created in 1998. If they do not possess an FFL, then no background checks are required when buying or selling a firearm. All gun dealers who deal with interstate and international commerce are required to have an FFL. However, you can still buy and sell firearms from individuals who are not gun dealers and do not possess an FFL. Thus negating the federal background check requirement.
Click to expand...
Huh. Quite a loophole. Don't know how you'd enforce those individual transactions, except by requiring a license, and the license requiring the background check on the owner, good for buying any gun anywhere.
 
MaryP said:
Huh. Quite a loophole. Don't know how you'd enforce those individual transactions, except by requiring a license, and the license requiring the background check on the owner, good for buying any gun anywhere.
Click to expand...
It is no loophole. Congress only has the authority to regulate interstate and international commerce. They do not have the authority to regulate wholly intrastate commerce. Which means Congress cannot lawfully prohibit individuals from buying or selling their property to other individuals, providing they live within the same State.

Any form of license or permit is an infringement and prohibited by the Second Amendment. Constitutionally protected rights are not licensed or permitted by government, and any attempt to do so will not be tolerated.
 
Glitch said:
No, you will not get a background check. Only if you buy your firearms from an FFL holder.

All my firearms were purchased from individuals residing in the same State as I. I have never filled out an ATF form 4473, nor do I ever intend to.
Click to expand...
This means absolutely nothing to me as I don't buy used guns.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Miami police chief calls new Texas handgun measure "ridiculous"

gettyimages-842618668.jpg




Anyone can carry a gun with no background check, no training, and no carry license? That is just more GOP insanity.

Republicans pretend that they support the police, but what they actually support is granting unlimited fire-power to every criminal and mentally-challenged individual in Texas.
Click to expand...
Of course he doesn't like it he's appointed and say's what he's told to say IF he likes his job and life style.
 
Rucker61 said:
To allow law abiding citizens to legally carry without a permit, aka Constitutional Carry. Criminals can't legally carry, as they can't legally possess a firearm.
Click to expand...
How do you distinguish a criminal with a gun and from a non-criminal with a gun?
1622508512384.webp
 
craig said:
How do you distinguish a criminal with a gun and from a non-criminal with a gun?
View attachment 67335808
Click to expand...
Why would criminals subject themselves to increased scrutiny be openly carrying rather than concealed carrying?

Were any of these people arrested for openly carrying a firearm?
 
Rucker61 said:
Why would criminals subject themselves to increased scrutiny be openly carrying rather than concealed carrying?

Were any of these people arrested for openly carrying a firearm?
Click to expand...
How do you know? When can the police ask? Did they prove they were not criminals and so allowed to carry arms?
 
craig said:
Did they prove they were not criminals and so allowed to carry arms?
Click to expand...
You don't have to prove you aren't a criminal to exercise rights. The burden of proof lies with the government.
 
Mycroft said:
Acevedo should read the US Constitution...in particular, that little part about "shall not be infringed".
Click to expand...
It's already infringed, several ways. Don't pretend the wording of the amendment is final.
Do you believe every citizen has the same right, or do you accept infringing on the rights of some?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom