First Bump Stocks, Next Universal Background Checks

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • INPatriot

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Aug 21, 2013
    482
    63
    God's Country
    If this is not worthy of a new thread so be it, but a fantastic example of giving an inch and the recipient expecting a mile. This is not meant to re-open the bump stock discussion (they're stupid anyway) but to show that quid pro quo (bump stocks for national reciprocity or bump stocks for suppressors/SBRs off NFA) is not what gun grabbers are thinking. They only think in terms of pro bono.

    Dem Sen Murphy: After Bump-Stock Ban, Universal Background Checks Are 'Next Step' in Gun Control - Breitbart
     

    lonehoosier

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    28   0   0
    May 3, 2011
    8,012
    63
    NWI
    Once again, NOT. ONE. MORE. INCH!!!

    Straight from the horses mouth.

    "House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) urged Ryan to allow a vote on a Democratic bill to ban the devices. When asked whether the bill might represent a slippery slope toward other gun restrictions, Pelosi said, “So what? . . . I certainly hope so.”

    https://hotair.com/archives/2017/10...n-bump-stocks-slippery-slope-gun-control/amp/
     
    Last edited:

    Hkindiana

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Sep 19, 2010
    3,175
    149
    Southern Hills
    On the news today, there was no mention of the bump fire stocks, HOWEVER, they were attacking FLASH HIDERS. They showed someone firing a weapon at night "without" a flash hider compared to another individual firing a weapon on a sunny day "With" a fkash hider to "show the difference". They went on to state that had the shooter "not been ALLOWED" to have/use flash hiders, it would have been easier for police to spot where he was shooting from. So, flash hiders must be the NEXT item on their list of BAN items.
     

    JAL

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 14, 2017
    2,161
    113
    Indiana
    On the agenda of some of the outspoken is repealing the 2nd Amendment as an antiquated, outdated, anachronism of the 18th Century that has no place whatsoever in the 21st Century followed by a total gun ban and national confiscation. How they even hope to accomplish that with 2/3 of both the House and the Senate followed by 3/4 of the states ratifying it (or a Constitutional Convention; likelihood of which = 0) is Bernie Sanders style pie in the sky pipe dreams, but they're pulling as hard as they can on the rope. (How is that for mixed metaphors?) It's being called: "The Cancer in the Constitution".

    John
     

    JAL

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 14, 2017
    2,161
    113
    Indiana
    If we need UBC's thenI guess I don't understand what the form 4473 is for...

    The UBC I understand it bans private firearm sales without a 4473. It means you'd have to through a FFL to sell a firearm to another person. It's touted as closing the "Gun Show Loophole" which has statistically been shown to be (1) mostly a myth, and (2) not a source of any significance of guns to criminals. This is not much different from buying a firearm via Cheaper Than Dirt and having it delivered to your LGS for FFL transfer. California already has this in their statutes. Individual states can enact it and IIRC California isn't the only one. California also has a required 10-day waiting period (sometimes called a cool-down period) allegedly created to help prevent crimes of passion.

    IMHO these are imagined issues. Criminals, the gang-bangers in particular, are still getting guns, handguns in paricular, through illegal purchases. Some are straw purchases (IIRC, it was BBI's Mope B's girlfriend) and some are individual sales between two people who know neither can legally possess a handgun due to their criminal past. The only thing UBC does is have the law abiding jump through hoops in private sales that the criminals will simply ignore.

    The real goal of many which some of the proposals would require to implement is a national gun registry which maintains all the guns you own by make, model, and serial number, the first step toward national gun confiscation. Until there's a registry, there's no means of conducting the required raids to forcibly collect them from those that refuse to voluntarily turn them in. Even the proposed "Insurance" requirement has a prerequisite national gun registry to ensure compliance, as does any firearm ownership quantity limits (also being proposed).

    Right now it's a free-for-all Christmas wish list being sent to Santa at the North Pole. If nothing got through Congress in the aftermath of Sandy Hook, none of this stuff beyond the "bump stock" type devices has any chance whatsoever of getting past Congress and Trump's signature.

    John
     

    Bennettjh

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Jul 8, 2012
    10,436
    113
    Columbus
    I'm not giving one inch. Can't let them get started. Bump stocks, then magazine capacity, then you name it, etc.
     

    Dentoro

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Nov 16, 2010
    670
    43
    Fairland
    I don't think anything much will happen fellas. Dems have been backing down because they see rino's are losing ground fast to republicans that stand ground. Everybody with brain cells firing knows this is either a bad set up or could not have been prevented. New laws will not help.. For all thei belly aching and soap box speeches I think they know they are talking in the wind and fear elections. I think even Paul Ryan knows he made a mistake and will about face. Reciprocity will be off the table but so will more laws.
     

    Old Dog

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Mar 4, 2016
    1,377
    97
    Central Indiana
    If we need UBC's thenI guess I don't understand what the form 4473 is for...

    The 4473 is your confirmation, promise, word that you are a proper person, and have been identified; and it establishes a tracking process back to the first retail purchaser should the weapon ever be recovered at a crime scene (which by the way rarely ever comes back to commission by the first purchaser).

    The Background check is the governments confirmation that the statements you provide on the 4473 are correct and honest after a check of filed government records (which we all know are 100% correct), therefore you are worthy of owning a firearm according to the government rules in place at that time.

    Neither predicts your future ability to go crazy, angry, or stupid; and therefore neither can prevent criminal or terrorist acts from occurring.
     
    Top Bottom