74% of NRA members support background checks
That is what a lady on the phone told me when I called her about her anti gun letter.
Who are those NRA members?
I asked her if she was aware of the pro gun rally Sat. she said yes. I asked if there was going to be a counter protest. Not that she was aware of. I asked then how she could feel the majority of Americans were for gun control when there are pro gun rallies but little to no counter protests?
That's when she cited the 74%
Who are those NRA members?
I asked her if she was aware of the pro gun rally Sat. she said yes. I asked if there was going to be a counter protest. Not that she was aware of. I asked then how she could feel the majority of Americans were for gun control when there are pro gun rallies but little to no counter protests?
That's when she cited the 74%
0
-
quote:Originally posted by jimdeere
I decide who I want to sell a gun to.
Good advice...[^]0 -
quote:Originally posted by TrinityScrimshaw
"No surprise there. The NRA's position has been for reasonable gun control since its inception."
I have heard this slander about the NRA for a long time, but not directly from the NRA. If they do support reasonable anything then the NRA must feel that "Universal Background Checks" (UBGC) are not reasonable.
Why else would they send all their NY members (And I'm sure others) an urgent message warning them about the dangerous pitfalls of falling for this misleading, benign sounding, and confusing phrase the Gun Grabbers are using in order to garner support for this legislation?
Bottom line, any legislation that criminalizes private transfer of a legally owned firearm between law-abiding gun owners is an infringement on the second amendment. Further, the only way to enforce UBGC is to create a national registry of all gun owners, and we all know what that leads to.[V]
Trinity +++
quote:
"The National Rifle Association has been in support of workable, enforceable gun control legislation since its very inception in 1871."
-NRA Executive Vice President Franklin L. Orth
NRA's American Rifleman Magazine, March 1968, P. 22
quote:
"We think it's reasonable to support the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act. ... We think it's reasonable to expect full enforcement of federal firearms laws by the federal government. ... That's why we support Project Exile -- the fierce prosecution of federal gun laws...we think it's reasonable because it works. ... We only support what works and our list is proud."
-NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre
Congressional Testimony, May 27, 1999
Hearing Before 106th Congress
House of Representatives
Committee On The Judiciary
Subcommittee On Crime
First Session
(source)0 -
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
We should implement background checks on far more products than just guns. Cars, knives, rope, hammers, hamburgers... I see no reason to limit them to just guns. You never know who's going to buy that rc helicopter!
back ground checks are done to get to license, so thus why buy a car if you do not have a license?
Felons dont need weapons sorry never going to buy that one. Question is how do you sort that one out? If its private check or public check and there is no record of it, I have no problem with it.0 -
quote:Originally posted by nards444
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
We should implement background checks on far more products than just guns. Cars, knives, rope, hammers, hamburgers... I see no reason to limit them to just guns. You never know who's going to buy that rc helicopter!
back ground checks are done to get to license, so thus why buy a car if you do not have a license?
Felons dont need weapons sorry never going to buy that one. Question is how do you sort that one out? If its private check or public check and there is no record of it, I have no problem with it.
keep felons locked up or make them dead. It's a simple solution that keeps being overlooked.0 -
quote:Originally posted by CDMead
They never called me.
Me either.0 -
[/quote]keep felons locked up or make them dead. It's a simple solution that keeps being overlooked.
[/quote]
Exactly, if a person is that bad that he cannot be trusted, why is he out in society. Prison overcrowding would not be a problem, if the death penalty was used more, and faster. No more 20-30 years on death row. Rape, especially with a child, no appeal.
Even the Canadians realized registration didn't work and did away with long gun registration(except Quebec), so why should we even start down this raod.0 -
quote:Originally posted by torosapo
Rape, especially with a child, no appeal.
Getting a little off topic here, but do you mean to suggest that there have never been cases of false (or mistaken) accusations with rape?
The appeals process helps to insure that injustices don't happen -- unfortunately they do happen in rape cases too frequently due to people (prosecutors, police and jurors) becoming too wrapped up in emotion to examine the facts rationally.
I'm sure you are aware of the cases where innocent people have spent decades of their life in prison before technology progressed to a point where it cleared them of the false charges/conviction? (I'm thinking about people convicted before DNA evidence, who are then cleared years later when the DNA evidence proves they didn't do it.)
You would actually say to people, "You had your day in court so new evidence proving your innocence can ever be presented to a court because the appeals process is closed to you."?
I'm thinking I wouldn't want to see the sort of "justice" system you are wanting.0 -
Yes I admit there are cases of false statements, especially in child custody battles. Ok I will give you the point on ONE appeal, but not multiples, especially when there is no doubt in anyones mind. There are evil people that should not be sucking air at all. Why is Manson still around, why did Dahlmer live as long as he did.
Young punks like the one suspected in the Vegas shooting, need to be put down, if he was the one to pull the trigger or even if he was just driving. That is what should be done.
But noooo someone will point out he was raised by a single mother. So what, my dad died when I was 13, I was 2nd oldest of 6. None of us went to prison or became criminals. Two of us served in the military.
Why should us law abiding citizens pay for what criminals do?
Rant over0 -
How about make it illegal to sell a gun to a felon (which it is), and provide citizens the option of using a background check to guarantee they aren't.
That way you can still sell to people you know, but will have an option of getting a background check if you're nervous about a sale?0 -
quote:Originally posted by fishermanben
How about make it illegal to sell a gun to a felon (which it is), and provide citizens the option of using a background check to guarantee they aren't.
That way you can still sell to people you know, but will have an option of getting a background check if you're nervous about a sale?
on your honor systems never work.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by nards444
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
We should implement background checks on far more products than just guns. Cars, knives, rope, hammers, hamburgers... I see no reason to limit them to just guns. You never know who's going to buy that rc helicopter!
back ground checks are done to get to license, so thus why buy a car if you do not have a license?
Felons dont need weapons sorry never going to buy that one. Question is how do you sort that one out? If its private check or public check and there is no record of it, I have no problem with it.
keep felons locked up or make them dead. It's a simple solution that keeps being overlooked.
I dont disagree that some people need to be put down. In that case you have be 100% sure that they are the PERP. Second the death penalty the way it sits take to long and cost to much to really make it effective.
Lastly do I think the guy that stole my car should own a gun so he can maybe do it again with a gun no. But do i think he should be killed the first time around, probably not. A family acquaitance well call it drove a car while his buddy got out and robbed a hooker with a pistol. The robber got armed robbery etc, the guy we knew basicallly got slammed with a felony aiding crime for being the driver, he says he didnt know about it, whatever you were there dude. Robber got like 10 the guy we know 5. Hes been out for 20 plus years and is productive member in society, should he have been killed no.
In these days and times there is going to be gun control whether it be right wrong or indifferent. Background checks is the least of my worries compared to bans and other things. Although you could say giving in on one thing means giving on other things in the future. But if you have to pick a poison I think you pick that one, and to a certain extent it probably does benefit us all regardless of who thinks they are being violated.0 -
quote:Originally posted by fishermanben
How about make it illegal to sell a gun to a felon (which it is), and provide citizens the option of using a background check to guarantee they aren't.
That way you can still sell to people you know, but will have an option of getting a background check if you're nervous about a sale?
Speaking for myself, I would NEVER sell a weapon to someone who made me"nervous about the sale."
To each his own.I'd have a hard time living it down if that person went on to use the weapon to kill someone.0 -
quote:Originally posted by nards444
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by nards444
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
We should implement background checks on far more products than just guns. Cars, knives, rope, hammers, hamburgers... I see no reason to limit them to just guns. You never know who's going to buy that rc helicopter!
back ground checks are done to get to license, so thus why buy a car if you do not have a license?
Felons dont need weapons sorry never going to buy that one. Question is how do you sort that one out? If its private check or public check and there is no record of it, I have no problem with it.
keep felons locked up or make them dead. It's a simple solution that keeps being overlooked.
I dont disagree that some people need to be put down. In that case you have be 100% sure that they are the PERP. Second the death penalty the way it sits take to long and cost to much to really make it effective.
Lastly do I think the guy that stole my car should own a gun so he can maybe do it again with a gun no. But do i think he should be killed the first time around, probably not. A family acquaitance well call it drove a car while his buddy got out and robbed a hooker with a pistol. The robber got armed robbery etc, the guy we knew basicallly got slammed with a felony aiding crime for being the driver, he says he didnt know about it, whatever you were there dude. Robber got like 10 the guy we know 5. Hes been out for 20 plus years and is productive member in society, should he have been killed no.
In these days and times there is going to be gun control whether it be right wrong or indifferent. Background checks is the least of my worries compared to bans and other things. Although you could say giving in on one thing means giving on other things in the future. But if you have to pick a poison I think you pick that one, and to a certain extent it probably does benefit us all regardless of who thinks they are being violated.
Can you explain for me, what law would keep the felon from obtaining a gun?0 -
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
We should implement background checks on far more products than just guns. Cars, knives, rope, hammers, hamburgers... I see no reason to limit them to just guns. You never know who's going to buy that rc helicopter!
Wait a minute there, cowboy. You can regulate everybody else all you want but stay away from my hobby! [;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by nards444
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
quote:Originally posted by nards444
quote:Originally posted by Mr. Perfect
We should implement background checks on far more products than just guns. Cars, knives, rope, hammers, hamburgers... I see no reason to limit them to just guns. You never know who's going to buy that rc helicopter!
back ground checks are done to get to license, so thus why buy a car if you do not have a license?
Felons dont need weapons sorry never going to buy that one. Question is how do you sort that one out? If its private check or public check and there is no record of it, I have no problem with it.
keep felons locked up or make them dead. It's a simple solution that keeps being overlooked.
I dont disagree that some people need to be put down. In that case you have be 100% sure that they are the PERP. Second the death penalty the way it sits take to long and cost to much to really make it effective.
Lastly do I think the guy that stole my car should own a gun so he can maybe do it again with a gun no. But do i think he should be killed the first time around, probably not. A family acquaitance well call it drove a car while his buddy got out and robbed a hooker with a pistol. The robber got armed robbery etc, the guy we knew basicallly got slammed with a felony aiding crime for being the driver, he says he didnt know about it, whatever you were there dude. Robber got like 10 the guy we know 5. Hes been out for 20 plus years and is productive member in society, should he have been killed no.
In these days and times there is going to be gun control whether it be right wrong or indifferent. Background checks is the least of my worries compared to bans and other things. Although you could say giving in on one thing means giving on other things in the future. But if you have to pick a poison I think you pick that one, and to a certain extent it probably does benefit us all regardless of who thinks they are being violated.
Can you explain for me, what law would keep the felon from obtaining a gun?
That would be the Gun Control Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-618).
Signed by President Johnson on 22 October 1968.
Now if you are reffering to the fact of a law doesnt stop anything, your right, there are speed limits and break them everyday. But if your notion is no laws on anything and reffering to an anarchy type society, good luck with maintaining any sort of order with that.0 -
quote:Originally posted by chollagardens
The background checks are not the problem. It is the record keeping the goverment does with the background checks that is the problem.I wonder if politicians have to have background checks.
You got that right, both the Bush and Obama administrations have been caught holding onto the NCIC data long past the time it was to have been deleted/discarded. And any statement they make regarding current compliance is hardly reassuring.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
46 comments