Winners only.

[ThxOne Premium Member]

The more hurdles they have to go through the better.

I will answer for you then since you can't.

No.
No.

 

[Bobbytwonames 5,000+ posts]

I will answer for you then since you can't.

No.
No.

You can't prove that and you know it. Why do you want to make it easier for these people to acquire guns?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

You can't prove that and you know it. Why do you want to make it easier for these people to acquire guns?

Proof works both ways.

How would it be making it easier? Nobody is getting rid of federal checks. It would stay the same. Why do you want to make it harder for law abiding people... why do you want more unarmed victims?

 

[metalheadjoe 10+ year member]

I wasnt talking about Texas .... the current background checks already go through ONE agency. again... you simply dont even know the process enough to talk intelligibly about this stuff

thats why pro-gun people dont listen to people like you.

Do pro-gun listen to people like you?

 

[metalheadjoe 10+ year member]

I'm not anti-gun. I think some changes need to be made. It might help and it might not help. Universal background checks need to be done on every gun purchase.

Not trying to start a fight. "It might help and it might not help" is not convincing. If it helps, most support it, but "it might not help" is enough reason for people to not support it. Most people are interested in help and against over-regulation.

 

[Bobbytwonames 5,000+ posts]

Proof works both ways.

How would it be making it easier? Nobody is getting rid of federal checks. It would stay the same. Why do you want to make it harder for law abiding people... why do you want more unarmed victims?

Really? Changing the age from 18 to 21 really hurts somebody? Universal background checks aren't required for all gun purchases right now. They should be.

 

[Bobbytwonames 5,000+ posts]

Not trying to start a fight. "It might help and it might not help" is not convincing. If it helps, most support it, but "it might not help" is enough reason for people to not support it. Most people are interested in help and against over-regulation.

How do you know it won't help unless you try?

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

It will make it harder for criminals to get guns. There is something wrong with this.

View attachment 39317

Funny how I could find and buy a firearm off the streets fairly easily without any kind of check...but I'd need a universal background check to legally buy a firearm under your idea...now which path will a criminal or somebody intent to do harm turn...

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Really? Changing the age from 18 to 21 really hurts somebody? Universal background checks aren't required for all gun purchases right now. They should be.

Are you people not aware of what past laws have done or something?

"Finally, in November 1993, Congress passed the Brady bill, a national five- day handgun waiting period to allow local police time for a background check. After five years, the national waiting period is scheduled to be replaced by an NRA-backed “instant check.” Dealers will be able to call in to a national data base of criminal records to ensure that weapons are not sold to purchasers in restricted categories. Those who pass the check will take possession of the weapon at the time of purchase. The instant check will not, however, nullify state waiting periods."

Do you want to change the name of the background check from the one they have now, the Instant Check (NICS) to the "Universal Background Check" (UBC)? I'm confused. Will changing the name thwart criminals?

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Are you people not aware of what past laws have done or something?

"Finally, in November 1993, Congress passed the Brady bill, a national five- day handgun waiting period to allow local police time for a background check. After five years, the national waiting period is scheduled to be replaced by an NRA-backed “instant check.” Dealers will be able to call in to a national data base of criminal records to ensure that weapons are not sold to purchasers in restricted categories. Those who pass the check will take possession of the weapon at the time of purchase. The instant check will not, however, nullify state waiting periods."

Do you want to change the name of the background check from the one they have now, the Instant Check (NICS) to the "Universal Background Check" (UBC)? I'm confused. Will changing the name thwart criminals?

I think he was talking for ALL purchases. Background checks are not required on all purchases at this time.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

I think he was talking for ALL purchases. Background checks are not required on all purchases at this time.

Federal law requires background checks on ALL guns sold by federally licensed gun dealers.
So that is one already in place.

Do you want to now require them for private sales as well? How will you monitor and regulate that? The only way to do it is to ban private sales. Or banning guns all together.

Have we thwarted the criminals yet... the one's who typically ignore laws anyway.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Maybe we should ban all CNC machines as well so nobody could build and assemble their own guns. Ban bullets!!! Yeah, let's do that too.

Cool, I am decent with a compound bow.

I hope criminals don't go back to pipe bombs and other expanding weapons. But hey, at that point we know the criminals will be getting smarter.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Federal law requires background checks on ALL guns sold by federally licensed gun dealers.
So that is one already in place.

Do you want to now require them for private sales as well? How will you monitor and regulate that? The only way to do it is to ban private sales. Or banning guns all together.

Have we thwarted the criminals yet... the one's who typically ignore laws anyway.

It's hard to be accurate since they are not reported, but it's estimated through a number of surveys that up to 22% of guns are obtained without any type of background check.

The only way to require it for private sales is if people were required to register guns by serial number, liek they do with a title on a car. When you transfer it, you transfer by serial number to prove you no longer own the gun that was used in that bank robbery last week.

It's a logical fallacy to say that laws do not deter criminals. They actually DO, but obviously not the ones who break them. But even then, they may have deterred the criminal at specific times/situations. Kind of like speed limits. They generally work, but people break them selectively.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

It's hard to be accurate since they are not reported, but it's estimated through a number of surveys that up to 22% of guns are obtained without any type of background check.

The only way to require it for private sales is if people were required to register guns by serial number, liek they do with a title on a car. When you transfer it, you transfer by serial number to prove you no longer own the gun that was used in that bank robbery last week.

It's a logical fallacy to say that laws do not deter criminals. They actually DO, but obviously not the ones who break them. But even then, they may have deterred the criminal at specific times/situations. Kind of like speed limits. They generally work, but people break them selectively.

What more gun laws and regulations will do is allow a motivated murderer to select another method to which to kill with. They will know ahead of time that if they choose the gun route it may delay their rampage unless they already possess the guns and ammo. (Because gun laws don't let anyone know if someone will snap down the road and kill). Now they can purchase legally the components to assemble whatever weapon they want to kill with.

Like needles with AIDS in them, or throwing ACID on people, or razor blades, or Trash trucks...