patrick.net

 
  forgot password?   register

#housing #investing #politics more»
736,826 comments in 75,784 posts by 10,912 registered users, 2 online now: BayArea, MMR

new post

Are you for universal backround checks for gun buyers ?

By marcus   2013 Jan 20, 2:22pm   2,834 views   26 comments   watch (1)   quote      

Are you for universal backround checks for gun buyers ?

Yes

No

Comments 1-26 of 26     Last »

1   thomaswong.1986     2013 Jan 20, 2:32pm  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

BTW.. universal sounds far to wide a catch...try national

check for what... 2nd amendment rights.. got a list of ALL US citizens somewhere
with issued national ID cards ... just flash your national ID card/voter card ...

well that opens a box of worms ... dont you think

2   swebb     2013 Jan 20, 2:41pm  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

It sounds good on the surface, but what does it mean? What does a background check entail? Is this just closing the "gun show loophole" or "private buyer/seller loophole" or whatever, or is it redefining something fundamental?

For the most part I'm in favor of some sort of checks for all buyers, but I'm also in favor of people being able to buy guns. I think there is some validity to the argument that an armed populous is a free populous. I also think that the "gun nuts" probably pose more of a risk to our country than the government they fear.

3   thomaswong.1986     2013 Jan 20, 3:06pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

swebb says

I also think that the "gun nuts" probably pose more of a risk to our country than the government they fear.

"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."

--Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824.

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

--Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).

4   lostand confused   223/223 = 100% civil   2013 Jan 20, 3:16pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

As with most things, it depends. What exactly will the background check include?

5   zzyzzx   571/571 = 100% civil   2013 Jan 20, 10:57pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

lostand confused says

As with most things, it depends. What exactly will the background check include?

I agree. The details are too important to leave out to make an informed decision. I think a better worded question would be something more along the lines of:

Should the gun show loophole be closed?

Since presumably there should be a good way to do this and still have gun shows.

6   marcus   688/692 = 99% civil   2013 Jan 21, 1:12am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

I was testing Patrick's new polling feature.

We already know from large polls that over 90% of American are for this.

7   lostand confused   223/223 = 100% civil   2013 Jan 21, 1:20am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

I don't know. They used the Patriot act to catch men hiring hookers-Elliott Spitzer and a bunch of less well known people. What does it include-I am tired of giving too much power to our govt. Is it a stretch to actually ask them what they are going to do , how and why? Why, as in why they think this will lower violence??

8   Tenpoundbass   992/993 = 99% civil   2013 Jan 21, 2:04am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

I'm sure we're all in favor of the Spirit, that one would expect is meant by "Universal Background checks" But like "Universal Healthcare" what in the fuck does that even mean?

Was it to hard to ask for "Mandatory" background checks on all firearms purchases? I don't' care anything that is ambiguously implied, because what passes, has never yielded the same results everyone just automatically assumed it would.

I would have to say, that it's not that I'm NOT for Universal background checks, as much as I'm not interested in finding out latter that universal in this case has less to do with what we would think it does and more to open up instances where our liberties are being chiseled away.

I say we go back to basics, if the law makers can't ask the questions the right way, then say no on every single thing, any of them propose.

Universal my ASS!

9   Tenpoundbass   992/993 = 99% civil   2013 Jan 21, 2:06am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

marcus says

We already know from large polls that over 90% of American are for this

And 90% of American's are embarrassing stupid.

10   Moderate Infidel     2013 Jan 21, 2:11am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

CaptainShuddup says

marcus says

We already know from large polls that over 90% of American are for this

And 90% of American's are embarrassing stupid.

I'm with stupid and he's not embarrassed.

11   Moderate Infidel     2013 Jan 21, 2:23am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Call it Crazy says

swebb says

It sounds good on the surface, but what does it mean? What does a background check entail?

Yup... The OP seems like a broad, open ended question..

What actually are "checking" for in the proposed background check??

Criminal history.

12   Thedaytoday     2013 Jan 21, 2:25am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

CaptainShuddup says

marcus says

We already know from large polls that over 90% of American are for this

And 90% of American's are embarrassing stupid.

and you should know your insights are often embarrassingly stupid

13   Tenpoundbass   992/993 = 99% civil   2013 Jan 21, 2:31am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Well here allow me to predict how this goes down.
There are about 100 security, bio scanner companies, Software vendors in Washington as the Jackals, Hyenas, and Lions are fighting over this Bambi carcuss. While America is pulling out their camera to capture the moment. They don't see the bloody gnashing teeth or hear the fierce roars of the beats. They are all saying a collective "AHHHH" as they snap a shot of poor Bambi, who's seen better days.

What I mean, there will be a lot of privacy intrusion interest that will get Carte blanche to background check people for everything and anything. Not just guns. Buy a car? Background check. Get any job? Background check. Get insurance? background check. enroll in school? Background check. Get married? Background check. Need a background check? Well first you must undergo a background check.

Oh but guns will still be stolen and bought and sold on the black market.
Serine pastoral landscapes will still be disturbed by a gun wielding lunatic, that never had a background check.

14   Tenpoundbass   992/993 = 99% civil   2013 Jan 21, 2:34am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Thedaytoday says

and you should know your insights...

You're one ignore deserving fuckstick.

15   Thedaytoday     2013 Jan 21, 3:25am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

CaptainShuddup says

Thedaytoday says

and you should know your insights...

You're one ignore deserving fuckstick.

Sticks and stones, fuckwit

Stop embarrassing yourself your a pathetic excuse of a man.

16   zzyzzx   571/571 = 100% civil   2013 Jan 21, 3:32am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Moderate Infidel says

Call it Crazy says

swebb says

It sounds good on the surface, but what does it mean? What does a background check entail?

Yup... The OP seems like a broad, open ended question..

What actually are "checking" for in the proposed background check??

Criminal history.

Don't the existing checks already do that?
Or is this the type of thing that's different in each state?

17   Thedaytoday     2013 Jan 21, 3:40am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

zzyzzx says

Don't the existing checks already do that?

Or is this the type of thing that's different in each state?

Nope, existing checks are not maintained.

Also noteworthy is gun shops do not need to keep inventory lists for the ATF!

18   thomaswong.1986     2013 Jan 21, 4:54pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

CaptainShuddup says

But like "Universal Healthcare" what in the fuck does that even mean?

vs National for say Nationalist ( US Citizens only )...

19   APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch     2013 Jan 21, 9:51pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

No, because everyone is supposed to be armed at all times, preferably with weaponry that uses belt-fed ammo.

20   elliemae     2013 Jan 21, 10:05pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Sure - why not. As long as we have people who are forbidden to have guns, they shouldn't be able to buy them.

Not sure how we can get the guy on the street selling a Saturday night special for $50 to call in a background check, tho. Free cellphones programmed to call them in?

Many areas of the country don't require gun registration. We don't track ownership - and I think it would be damn hard to start now.

21   Fucking White Male   234/235 = 99% civil   2013 Jan 21, 11:48pm  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Lol@ the idea that some how most criminals that use guns obtain them in a legal manner.

Let me give you a clue. Some guns that are illegally possessed are stolen. The vast majority are illegally shipped here with serial numbers and other identifiers already re-moved.

This is why further laws limiting guns possession are an absolutely futile exercise.

22   Moderate Infidel     2013 Jan 22, 1:16am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

dodgerfanjohn says

This is why further laws limiting guns possession are an absolutely futile exercise.

If guns are "possessed" we need to get the Catholic church involved.

23   FortWayne   426/430 = 99% civil   2013 Jan 22, 1:27am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

And one day the background check is ran by the feds, takes 6 month to complete, and only allows government authorities to pass the check.

Where do I sign up for that totalitarian government again?

24   Moderate Infidel     2013 Jan 22, 1:39am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

FortWayne says

Where do I sign up for that totalitarian government again?

Try the Republican party.

25   Thedaytoday     2013 Jan 22, 4:11am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

FortWayne says

And one day the background check is ran by the feds, takes 6 month to complete, and only allows government authorities to pass the check.

Where do I sign up for that totalitarian government again?

Nope. Idiot.

26   Thedaytoday     2013 Jan 22, 6:28am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

elliemae says

Many areas of the country don't require gun registration. We don't track ownership - and I think it would be damn hard to start now.

No, it's possible. Why would you think otherwise?

Comments 1-26 of 26     Last »

users   about   suggestions   contact  
topics   random post   best comments   comment jail  
patrick's 40 proposals  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home