Background Checks to Eliminate GFZs

[Denny347]

The Left is screaming for more background checks. I know most of us here disagree with a background check, but since we do it for a LTCH or a Stamp, why not cave into their wish, and offer our conditions to acceptance.

Once you pass a background check, you're deemed 'safe' so therefore there should be no more GFZ and national reciprocity.

So I'll submit to a background check if I can carry on an airplane.

Looks like it's the right pushing the background checks, Trump is spearheading it. Since he likes it, so does the rest of the GOP.

https://fox59.com/2019/08/08/mcconnell-says-senate-will-consider-gun-background-checks/

 

[hopper68]

​Background checks are no big deal, they just need to be more thorough. You will just need to fill out a form and send it in to the ATF and wait 6 months.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Looks like it's the right pushing the background checks, Trump is spearheading it. Since he likes it, so does the rest of the GOP.

https://fox59.com/2019/08/08/mcconnell-says-senate-will-consider-gun-background-checks/

I don't think they're "pushing" it so much as offering it up as a bargaining chip against registration and confiscation. And I'm all for releasing juvenile criminal records, and the records of those "adjudicated" (through due process - not just because you've been prescribed anti-depressants or something) mentally ill to the NICS system.

 

[MCgrease08]

I don't think they're "pushing" it so much as offering it up as a bargaining chip against registration and confiscation. And I'm all for releasing juvenile criminal records, and the records of those "adjudicated" (through due process - not just because you've been prescribed anti-depressants or something) mentally ill to the NICS system.

If Republicans had any backbone at all they would tell gun grabbers to **** right the hell off and focus on strengthening families and teaching boys how to be men. Instead we get bull**** like this from Mitch McConnell,

The Republican leader has been under pressure to call senators back to Washington from their summer recess to work on gun measures. He rejected that idea, saying it would just lead to senators “scoring points and nothing would happen.”

Instead he wants to spend the August recess talking with Democratic and Republican senators to see what’s possible.

“What we can’t do is fail to pass something,” McConnell said. “What I want to see here is an outcome.”

 

[d.kaufman]

If Republicans had any backbone at all they would tell gun grabbers to **** right the hell off and focus on strengthening families and teaching boys how to be men. Instead we get bull**** like this from Mitch McConnell,

Rep inbound

 

[ditcherman]

Also so where clear I want constitutional carry and you shouldent be free if you can't be trusted with a weapon. But I'm trying to think of a practical way to get rid of the backdoor registration we have and appease the unappeasable Dems.

Do not appease the dems even if they were appeasable.

 

[Injess]

The Left is screaming for more background checks. I know most of us here disagree with a background check, but since we do it for a LTCH or a Stamp, why not cave into their wish, and offer our conditions to acceptance.

Once you pass a background check, you're deemed 'safe' so therefore there should be no more GFZ and national reciprocity.

So I'll submit to a background check if I can carry on an airplane.

Reminds of the old saying "give an inch, take a mile". The current gun laws are as sensible as they ever will be, and in some cases I feel they're overreaching as it is. I don't think being allowed to carry on a plane is a good idea either. I've seen how other people at the range shoot. I'll take my chances with my hands against a box cutter even though box cutters are no longer allowed. I say no more backwards steps, half measures or compromises. I've already seen headlines about the Dayton Ohio shooting, and how the shooter used a "legal loophole". I guess they're complaining about how a pistol brace circumvents the short barreled rifle laws. I guess they don't understand you typically have to be older, 21, to buy a pistol, and the shorter barrel lowers the velocity of the round, granted when talking about a round that travels avg 3,000 fps, 2,400 doesn't really mean a whole lot. Its still the same old story of them going after the tools and accessories rather than the real cause.


Ok, I'm done venting my frustration... for now.

 

[actaeon277]

 

[DoggyDaddy]

If Republicans had any backbone at all they would tell gun grabbers to **** right the hell off and focus on strengthening families and teaching boys how to be men. Instead we get bull**** like this from Mitch McConnell,

I can't disagree with this. Unfortunately I don't know that you can legislate strengthening families and teaching boys how to be men. I'm afraid that ship sailed when they made it more profitable to have kids out of wedlock and not have a two parent household.

 

[eldirector]

I can't disagree with this. Unfortunately I don't know that you can legislate strengthening families and teaching boys how to be men. I'm afraid that ship sailed when they made it more profitable to have kids out of wedlock and not have a two parent household.

Well, that would be a start. Stop rewarding otherwise poor choices.

Several things could be done with the tax code and how "benefits" are calculated and disbursed, that could tip the scale towards strong nuclear families, or even towards two-parent / single-income families. Today, millions of people intentionally do not marry, and intentionally have "one more kid", and intentionally game the system. Heck, I know someone personally who turned down a raise/promotion at work because it would have reduced their SNAP benefit. How screwed up is that?!? **

I am not a tax law person... but I suspect would could have a lower rate or give a credit for low income married couples (or single-income married couples) that would exceed the rate/credit they would get if single. Make it "sticky" by crediting across years (get married and stay married, get even better credits). Encourage folks to rise out of poverty, by extending credits for moving up. Reward single-earner families for going up a bracket, by giving them a huge multi-year credit (lift yourself out of poverty, and you pay no income tax for a couple of years. Maybe still get some % of your previous poverty benefits).

If the above is a carrot, the "stick" is "no free lunch", at least from the State (charities can do as they wish, of course). Want SNAP? You can help unload the grocery truck that morning. Want your "free" cell phone? Keep your side of the block litter and weed free. There are thousands of "jobs" that could completely transform a city. Those jobs can lead to work experience, which can lead to real employment.

All this would requires us to change attitudes. We have to actually want to HELP people rise up, not just make it easy to be poor.

**Interesting enough, they ended up unemployed. They were offered a promotion because the current position was going to be eliminated by a new piece of equipment. They hired someone else into the new/better position to run said equipment, and cut her a few weeks later. At least she still had SNAP....

 

[Lex Concord]

Not saying they are, just saying that if “felons shouldn’t have guns”, then how do you do that without checking?

Keep them in prison until they are deemed safe to resume their rights.

Ditch mandatory minimums that clog prisons with non-violence so we have room for Theo we who can’t be trusted to be free

 

[Lex Concord]

double tap

 

[Tombs]

Keep them in prison until they are deemed safe to resume their rights.

Ditch mandatory minimums that clog prisons with non-violence so we have room for Theo we who can’t be trusted to be free

Right on point.

Why on earth would ANYONE support someone being allowed on the streets who has been deemed to be a significant threat to themselves or others?
And adding to that, even if police confiscate their guns, what happens when they just dig up a gun they buried before all of this happened. The police will never find it when serving a warrant like this, and now they've just made this "dangerous" person very angry and likely to target the person who told the police to go after them.

 

[jamil]

The Left is screaming for more background checks. I know most of us here disagree with a background check, but since we do it for a LTCH or a Stamp, why not cave into their wish, and offer our conditions to acceptance.

Once you pass a background check, you're deemed 'safe' so therefore there should be no more GFZ and national reciprocity.

So I'll submit to a background check if I can carry on an airplane.

Why not cave into their wish? Because it’s more fun to tell them to kiss my...

I’m not willing to cave in to nonsense. Background checks are a solution for a different problem. The problem anti-gun zealots are trying to solve is that there aren’t enough restrictions on firearms. It doesn’t matter that the restrictions are ineffective to stop violence. It matters that they restrict firearm ownership. If they were interested in solving the violence they’d look for for the actual cause.

 

[eldirector]

Why not cave into their wish? Because it’s more fun to tell them to kiss my...

I’m not willing to cave in to nonsense. Background checks are a solution for a different problem. The problem anti-gun zealots are trying to solve is that there aren’t enough restrictions on firearms. It doesn’t matter that the restrictions are ineffective to stop violence. It matters that they restrict firearm ownership. If they were interested in solving the violence they’d look for for the actual cause.

This.

The operative word in "Gun Control" is CONTROL.

I would argue that not a single politician wants to actually stop the violence. They benefit TOO MUCH from it. On both sides of the isle. If they wanted to solve the problem, they would. I have not yet seen a single piece of legislation that makes any attempt, at all, to address a root cause.

 

[ljk]

Guns provide the protection to the People from The Government. The threat of Tyrannical government today is as bad as, if not worse than 200+ years ago.

Democrats want to have big government to control people. Gun Control is people control and it's Democrats' major political agenda. And it's a fact, every time there's a mass shooting, it pushes an inch forward on the control agenda.

12 mass shootings, they got a foot.

There will be more mass shootings, because the Democrats know it works in their favor, they have no intention to stop it.

Universal Background Check is a De Facto Registration. Confiscation is the result of Registration.

And the violence will NOT stop at Confiscation, there will be more violence even with all the guns were wiped out out. Just look at London, Eng.

As for the mental health issue.

#1. What makes you a mentally ill? There isn't a clean cut line medically to determent someone is mentally ill, it's a Spectrum, there is no scan, or blood test or a measurement you can take, it's all subjective.

There are 330 million people in this country, everyone of them could be a gun owner, w

#2. Who determent someone is mentally ill? there are 330 million people in this country, every one of them could be a gun owner. Tell me how do you have them all evaluated.


[video=youtube;kn200lvmTZc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kn200lvmTZc[/video]

 

[amafrank]

Maybe when they agree to background checks on voters it will be time to actually talk. As it is now they support the "right" of non citizens to vote so screw em. No background checks will prevent stupidity and lunatic behavior. Allowing illegals to vote is more criminal in any case and the left seems to think its a racist thing to require ID. We should be claiming its racist to demand background checks.

Frank

 

[actaeon277]

Maybe when they agree to background checks on voters it will be time to actually talk. As it is now they support the "right" of non citizens to vote so screw em. No background checks will prevent stupidity and lunatic behavior. Allowing illegals to vote is more criminal in any case and the left seems to think its a racist thing to require ID. We should be claiming its racist to demand background checks.

Frank

When people roll their eyes about voting, saying voting doesn't kill, point out voting determines government action, and governments can kill people wholesale.

 

[jamil]

When people roll their eyes about voting, saying voting doesn't kill, point out voting determines government action, and governments can kill people wholesale.

When they roll their eyes, I’d say if voting doesn’t kill then how can Trump voters have blood on their hands. You can’t have it both ways.

 

[actaeon277]

When they roll their eyes, I’d say if voting doesn’t kill then how can Trump voters have blood on their hands. You can’t have it both ways.

They fail to recognize hypocrisy.