Fox new poll (reg. voter) Scares me about what we must do to keep our guns & 2A

[openwell]

 

[patience0830]

Fools on the rise.

 

[dusty88]

Speaker at March 24 rally "We will take the big and we will take the small, but we will keep fighting. When they give us that inch, that bump stock ban, we will take a mile."

 

[NyleRN]

Poll is worthless. When have we gotten 65% collective to agree on anything? That's from the sissy fox weekend crew also

 

[CPT Nervous]

"Of 1000 uninformed anti gun people we talked to, this is how they responded."

 

[SnoopLoggyDog]

Looks like a poll of "registered voters in Chicago".

 

[Coach]

How in the **** can only 69% be for armed guards in schools?????

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

You know...I tend to believe that poll. Just by overhearing conversations, interactions on FB, etc., I sense there is some validity to it. It may not be to that extent (reported in the OP) but there's a reason our legislators ditched constitutional carry in Indy again this year, let the church carry bill die on the vine, why the suppressor thing and the national reciprocity bills haven't advanced. If people other than us in this echo chamber were advocating for these sorts of things, they would be passing and the "fix-NICS" and the bump stock ban would have been laughed off the table.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

How in the **** can only 69% be for armed guards in schools?????

Because (I think) there's a large constituency that believe there should be NO guns of any kind in schools.

 

[CPT Nervous]

Because (I think) there's a large constituency that believe there should be NO guns of any kind in schools.

Well, as we all know, guns cause​ violence. Remove the guns, remove the violence. It's very simple.

 

[rob63]

The problem with polls is that there is a large segment of society that will agree to anything if they think it is the popular opinion. Thus, the ever changing numbers as people reevaluate what they think is currently popular. Polls are basically a middle-school class election.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Well, as we all know, guns cause​ violence. Remove the guns, remove the violence. It's very simple.

They think so.

 

[CPT Nervous]

They think so.

You need to lock up your guns when you're not carrying them. Not to prevent unauthorized access, or theft, but because when you're not home, your guns ARE going out and killing people. This is also why you should keep your guns and ammunition stored separately. This is why I fully support gun storage requirements.

 

[edporch]

A Universal Background Check is an unenforceable law, at least with regard to the firearms that are already in private hands.

For it to work, EVERY firearm privately possessed in the USA when the law is enacted would have to first be registered with the government, or private sales would not be able to be tracked.

Until then, private sales of firearms that were already in private hands when the law took effect between individuals would be virtually unenforceable.

 

[openwell]

A Universal Background Check is an unenforceable law, at least with regard to the firearms that are already in private hands.

For it to work, EVERY firearm privately possessed in the USA when the law is enacted would have to first be registered with the government, or private sales would not be able to be tracked.

Until then, private sales of firearms that were already in private hands when the law took effect between individuals would be virtually unenforceable.

Yes ;however, NRA members, law abiding citizens would follow the law. Criminals would not. just another law-on-the-books for the "feel-good" liberals.

PS: gun owners would fight very hard against such a law and the NRA would be frontline in the fight.

 

[BigRed]

Some fumbducks do not realize that natural rights are not granted by state and "popular" opinion.

 

[BigRed]

, EVERY firearm privately possessed in the USA when the law is enacted would have to first be registered with the government,.

Exactly what these bastards want.

 

[openwell]

Exactly what these bastards want.

well, maybe even Indiana already has such data? well Indiana sheriffs. Back when I had an FFL and you purchased a handgun in Indiana you had Federal 4473 and Indiana form which

was sent to county sheriff. IN law required them to destroy such forms as I recall after 30 days ;however, there was no penalty to county sheriffs if the failed to destroy such forms. So, I

believe there is already a database of handguns in Indiana. The change in law which removed requirement to eliminate such "secondary transfers" with county sheriffs was enacted

around the year 1995? or there abouts.

Listening on NRAtv.com and Dana Loesch I just learned that california has universal background checks which includes 10 day waiting period!

So, there is already gun owner database in the very liberal california and even handguns here in Indiana.

 

[SirLiftsALatte]

A Universal Background Check is an unenforceable law, at least with regard to the firearms that are already in private hands.

For it to work, EVERY firearm privately possessed in the USA when the law is enacted would have to first be registered with the government, or private sales would not be able to be tracked.

Until then, private sales of firearms that were already in private hands when the law took effect between individuals would be virtually unenforceable.

Yes ;however, NRA members, law abiding citizens would follow the law. Criminals would not. just another law-on-the-books for the "feel-good" liberals.

PS: gun owners would fight very hard against such a law and the NRA would be frontline in the fight.

A few ATF stings, and everyone here would be following the law whether we wanted to or not. Just like we follow the IN resident requirement, and ask if a buyer is a prohibited person.

I'd bet that given how often some people buy/sell/trade used guns, a sizeable percentage of the used guns that are out in the wild would be registered via 4473 within 5 years.

 

[openwell]

A few ATF stings, and everyone here would be following the law whether we wanted to or not. Just like we follow the IN resident requirement, and ask if a buyer is a prohibited person.

I'd bet that given how often some people buy/sell/trade used guns, a sizeable percentage of the used guns that are out in the wild would be registered via 4473 within 5 years.

Not to burst your bubble ;however, in face-to-face sale say in Indianapolis "presence" satisfies the IN residency thing so you don't need to ask. for what it's worth.

I would not use it if I had to meet somebody in Terre Haute let's say. I don't like to drive that far so doesn't affect me.