Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30

Thread: ‘Universal Background Checks’ – Absolutely Not

  1. #1
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    ‘Universal Background Checks’ – Absolutely Not

    Florida - -(Ammoland.com)- Imagine a grandfather who wants to give a family shotgun to his 12-year-old grandson having to do a background check on his grandson before giving him the shotgun.

    Or a friend having to do a background check on his lifetime best buddy before lending him a hunting rifle.

    Or, if your mother had a prowler at her home, having to do a background check on your own Mom before you could give her one of your guns for protection.

    That’s what “universal background checks” do. They turn traditional innocent conduct into a criminal offense. They target you, law-abiding gun owners.

    Universal background checks are background checks on EVERY transfer, sale, purchase, trade, gift, rental, and loan of a firearm between any and all individuals.

    All background checks must be conducted through a federally licensed dealer. (costing hard earned cash) Universal background checks have nothing to do with gun shows – they are about you.

    It is ALREADY a federal felony to be engaged in the business of buying and selling firearms and ammunition without having federal firearm dealers license.
    It is ALREADY a crime for a federally licensed dealer to sell a gun without doing a background check – that’s all dealers, everywhere, including at retail stores, gun shows, flea markets or anywhere else.
    Further, it is ALREADY a federal felony for any private person to sell, trade, give, lend, rent or transfer a gun to a person you know or should have known is not legally allowed to own, purchase or possess a firearm.

    The penalty for selling a gun to a person who is a criminal, mentally ill, mentally incompetent, alcohol abuser or drug abuser is 10-year federal felony. That’s now, today, with no changes to the law.

    It is even a federal felony to submit false information on a background check form for the purpose of purchasing a firearm.

    Even so, according to a 2012 report to the Department of Justice, more than 72,000 people were turned down on a gun purchase in 2010 because they didn’t pass the background check. Yet, only 44 of those cases were prosecuted.

    Why, when criminals are caught in act of lying on the form to illegally purchase a firearm are they not prosecuted?

    On Thursday, January 10, 2013, in the White House meeting of President Obama’s Gun Agenda Task Force, Vice President Joe Biden answered that question, telling NRA’s Director of Federal Affairs, James Baker, that the Obama administration didn’t have time to prosecute people for lying on the federal background check form.

    In an article in The Daily Caller (1/18/2013) Biden said, “And to your point,
    Mr. Baker, regarding the lack of prosecutions on lying on Form 4473s, we simply don’t have the time or manpower to prosecute everybody who lies on a form, that checks a wrong box, that answers a question inaccurately.”

    If the Obama Administration currently doesn’t have the time or manpower to prosecute those who lie on background check forms, then why do they want more background checks, more paperwork and more forms? It’s backdoor gun registration.

    Universal background check system legislation that we have previously seen, allows the government to keep a computerized government registry of gun owners.

    In addition to the absurdity of having to do background checks on people you know are not criminals, would you like to pay up to $100 or more just to give your grandson a shotgun or lend a hunting rifle to your best friend or give your Mom a gun for protection?

    Transfer fees alone could run from $50 up. Firearms dealers, like other businesses, charge as much as they can get away with. Background check fees for a federally mandated program can be any amount they decide.

    The Obama administration’s gun ban agenda and universal background check system are unconstitutional regulatory schemes to gut the Second Amendment. These proposals which mandate the government collection of data on lawful gun buyers and sellers amount to universal gun registration and gun owner licensing.

    This agenda focuses on peaceable citizens, not violent criminals who obtain guns on the black-market to carry out unspeakable crimes already prohibited under federal and state laws. Instead of stopping crime and eliminating criminal conduct, they are creating more criminals – they are targeting you.

    That’s why NRA Members and the nation’s 100 million firearms owners will stand in solidarity and fight against these misguided and diabolical proposals that have nothing whatsoever to do with curbing criminal violence but everything to do with stripping us of our guaranteed civil rights and our freedom.

    Marion P. Hammer is past President of the National Rifle Association and is Executive Director of Unified Sportsmen of Florida

    http://www.ammoland.com/2013/01/univ...#axzz2IomN3hMM
    Last edited by ccwinstructor; 01-23-2013 at 02:28 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690

    They are unconstitutional anyways

    The ones they way they are being, (mis)applied go against the constitutional principle of being innocent until proven guilty.

    Then you have the whole idea that once you've been convicted of a felony, the much easier to convict 'domestic violence,' and/or have the least non-crime of having a restraining order awarded against you, or in the process of fighting any CHARGE of felony and/or domestic violence you can't own firearms.

    If a person is so dangerous that the government and it's bootlickers says that they should not own firearms then why did they let them out of jail?

    Once a person is out of jail the punishment should be over. They should be able to own guns again and if they commit a crime with them, I would hope that, an armed citizen will stop the need of the state from ever having to house and feed them ever again.

    Domestic violence has such a low bar for proving of guilt that it's sickening that it's used to disarm someone ever.

    Back in the 'old days' once you did your time you were given your guns back and told to not screw up like that again. At least one state would issue you a double barrel shotgun and (I think it was) a mule upon release. It was a way of recognizing your right to defend yourself and your right to travel and to symbolize that you were now a freeman once again.

    The current background checks are an infringement on my right to keep and bear arms.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  3. #3
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,272
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    The ones they way they are being, (mis)applied go against the constitutional principle of being innocent until proven guilty.

    Then you have the whole idea that once you've been convicted of a felony, the much easier to convict 'domestic violence,' and/or have the least non-crime of having a restraining order awarded against you, or in the process of fighting any CHARGE of felony and/or domestic violence you can't own firearms.

    If a person is so dangerous that the government and it's bootlickers says that they should not own firearms then why did they let them out of jail?

    Once a person is out of jail the punishment should be over. They should be able to own guns again and if they commit a crime with them, I would hope that, an armed citizen will stop the need of the state from ever having to house and feed them ever again.

    Domestic violence has such a low bar for proving of guilt that it's sickening that it's used to disarm someone ever.

    Back in the 'old days' once you did your time you were given your guns back and told to not screw up like that again. At least one state would issue you a double barrel shotgun and (I think it was) a mule upon release. It was a way of recognizing your right to defend yourself and your right to travel and to symbolize that you were now a freeman once again.

    The current background checks are an infringement on my right to keep and bear arms.
    No argument from me, I agree completely. Besides it does not work anymore than drug laws do.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3

    ‘Universal Background Checks’ – Absolutely Not

    And again, our Government wants to make more laws, but not enforce the current laws they already have.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

  5. #5
    Regular Member Jakeus314's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    81

    ‘Universal Background Checks’ – Absolutely Not

    Completely agree. That original post will be reposted by me for sure.

    I suggest that we redefine cruel and unusual in 8A. The punishment of prison and/or death is bad, but obviously not bad enough to deter extreme degenerates from acting. The unusual is only unusual because it is happens less often. Prison is cruel if you ask me... So let's kick it up a notch and give these animals something real to fear.

    Eye for an eye isn't enough for some criminals.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    Completely agree. That original post will be reposted by me for sure.

    I suggest that we redefine cruel and unusual in 8A. The punishment of prison and/or death is bad, but obviously not bad enough to deter extreme degenerates from acting. The unusual is only unusual because it is happens less often. Prison is cruel if you ask me... So let's kick it up a notch and give these animals something real to fear.

    Eye for an eye isn't enough for some criminals.
    So when are you going into arrest most of the members of the house and the senate?

    Before you argue for treating people in prison as animals you should really argue for the punishment of the real criminals.
    Seeing as how our prosecutors only want to put people in prison and most care nothing for honest justice your comment is sickening. Why not work on treating them like humans and work on getting the innocent ones out of prison? Let's arm all the citizens because that will create a social punishment that is much more effective than a behind bars punishment in most cases.

    A rapist might be treated okay in prison but in society, he could be made fun of. What, you're so bad at sex you have to force women to have it with you?
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  7. #7
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Universal background checks ought to be, well, Universal.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  8. #8
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Universal background checks ought to be, well, Universal.
    So true.....in theory. The reality is never in alignment with theory.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  9. #9
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,272
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    Universal background checks ought to be, well, Universal.
    When you figure out how to get the bad guys to give and submit to background checks, let me know.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  10. #10
    Regular Member Jakeus314's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    81

    ‘Universal Background Checks’ – Absolutely Not

    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    So when are you going into arrest most of the members of the house and the senate?

    Before you argue for treating people in prison as animals you should really argue for the punishment of the real criminals.
    Seeing as how our prosecutors only want to put people in prison and most care nothing for honest justice your comment is sickening. Why not work on treating them like humans and work on getting the innocent ones out of prison? Let's arm all the citizens because that will create a social punishment that is much more effective than a behind bars punishment in most cases.

    A rapist might be treated okay in prison but in society, he could be made fun of. What, you're so bad at sex you have to force women to have it with you?
    I'm referring to punishing evil people more... That's it.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    I'm referring to punishing evil people more... That's it.
    My original question still stands then.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  12. #12
    Regular Member Jakeus314's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    81

    ‘Universal Background Checks’ – Absolutely Not

    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    My original question still stands then.
    A wrongful conviction is a nightmare for many people. I can't explain why they happen and I would never suggest that I know how to fix a problem like that. I just think prison or death isn't a significant crime deterrent for horrible people.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    A wrongful conviction is a nightmare for many people. I can't explain why they happen and I would never suggest that I know how to fix a problem like that. I just think prison or death isn't a significant crime deterrent for horrible people.
    Still dodging Or was there a failure to communicate?

    I will believe it was the later of the two.

    So, when are you going to start arresting and punishing congress critters?
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    ...I just think prison or death isn't a significant crime deterrent for horrible people.
    No doubt, the possibility does not even cross the minds of some, but the deterrent effect is there for many.

    Most people mature into a good sense of right and wrong. They don't need laws and prison to motivate them to do the right thing. Some people only mature to the point where they can make rational decisions as to what is best for them. These are the people we try to keep on the straight and narrow through the use of laws and prison. Some people never develop any kind of moral sense, nor any kind of common sense. Yes, prisons and laws have zero effect on these folks. So we should give up the benefit from laws and prison realized among the second group because of the third??? I don't think so.

    On edit: Oh, and deterrence is just one of the uses of prison. The main use? It separates the violent garbage from the rest of us. At least for a while.
    Last edited by eye95; 01-26-2013 at 08:03 AM.

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member Tess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Alexandria, Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    3,764
    "Background check" is a misnomer. "Transaction check" is more descriptive.

    Try doing a "background check" on a PERSON, not a firearm. Ain't happenin'. What should it matter what particular firearm a buyer is attempting to purchase?

    IF AND ONLY IF it ever becomes background, and not firearm, I'll reconsider my position and may or may not support the idea based on facts, not on what some politician wants me to believe.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,011
    I would still like one of our legislators here in MO to propose a change in the background check rules that would allow CCW holders to skip the NICS check. Every other time I puchase a firearm, I get held up for a couple of days. Not consistent at all and that begs the question whether it's an effective check or not. I believe that Michigan has a provision like that.

  17. #17
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,272
    Quote Originally Posted by beebobby View Post
    I would still like one of our legislators here in MO to propose a change in the background check rules that would allow CCW holders to skip the NICS check. Every other time I puchase a firearm, I get held up for a couple of days. Not consistent at all and that begs the question whether it's an effective check or not. I believe that Michigan has a provision like that.
    I would prefer the check be taken off the books, it is a huge waste of money that the government does not have. A needless hoop that does nothing to prevent crime.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  18. #18
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    I would prefer the check be taken off the books, it is a huge waste of money that the government does not have. A needless hoop that does nothing to prevent crime.
    We are in agreement on this issue.

    Hence, my proposal mentioned before.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  19. #19
    Regular Member Jakeus314's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    81

    ‘Universal Background Checks’ – Absolutely Not

    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    I would prefer the check be taken off the books, it is a huge waste of money that the government does not have. A needless hoop that does nothing to prevent crime.
    So, I'd say the same thing but people claim we are just looking for excuses to avoid background checks to hide our past or some crap. Bottom line it won't prevent crime so it's a waste. They feel just the opposite, so again logic and reason fails them.

  20. #20
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,272
    Quote Originally Posted by Jakeus314 View Post
    So, I'd say the same thing but people claim we are just looking for excuses to avoid background checks to hide our past or some crap. Bottom line it won't prevent crime so it's a waste. They feel just the opposite, so again logic and reason fails them.
    IMO nobody should be labeled for their past, unless they are serving their due process. If we really really expect people to pay forever for the sins committed, then most politicians could not be in office. I have real problems with the fact that felons after changing their lives must live with a F tattooed on their forehead, yet other felons can hold office. Why should it be any different for a person convicted of using cocaine, paid their time, changed their life, and the present president who admitted to it's use in a book, and never served a day for his crime. The whole idea is backasswards.

    Our current system encourages ex cons to be criminals. It rewards those that did not get caught. If indeed a person is dangerous leave them in prison.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Slidell, Louisiana
    Posts
    2,464
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    IMO nobody should be labeled for their past, unless they are serving their due process. If we really really expect people to pay forever for the sins committed, then most politicians could not be in office. I have real problems with the fact that felons after changing their lives must live with a F tattooed on their forehead, yet other felons can hold office. Why should it be any different for a person convicted of using cocaine, paid their time, changed their life, and the present president who admitted to it's use in a book, and never served a day for his crime. The whole idea is backasswards.

    Our current system encourages ex cons to be criminals. It rewards those that did not get caught. If indeed a person is dangerous leave them in prison.
    +1

    Even further... no one should be denied their right to self defense by arms unless they are in the physical custody of the state.
    Last edited by georg jetson; 01-29-2013 at 10:29 AM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member zekester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Uvalde, Texas
    Posts
    665
    [QUOTE=WalkingWolf;1889451] "the present president who admitted to it's use(cocaine) in a book, and never served a day for his crime."


    The constitution and the laws are only for use and abuse of the President, not for us little people..
    GOD gave me rights!!!....The Constitutuion just confirms it!!

  23. #23
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by georg jetson View Post
    +1

    Even further... no one should be denied their right to self defense by arms unless they are in the physical custody of the state.
    Bingo, that is the point we are making.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  24. #24
    Regular Member sraacke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saint Gabriel, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,222
    Here's what I'm unclear on.
    In Louisiana you have to be 21 years old to purchase a pistol from a FL dealer.
    At 18 years old you can purchase a pistol via private sale or even be gifted a gun.
    With uninversal background checks I'm assuming you'd have to make any private sales through a FFL dealer.
    So... Would these private sales restrict sales to only those 21+ years old and leave out sales to persons who are 18-20 years old?
    President/ Founding Member
    Louisiana Open Carry Awareness League
    www.laopencarry.org

  25. #25
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,272
    Quote Originally Posted by georg jetson View Post
    +1

    Even further... no one should be denied their right to self defense by arms unless they are in the physical custody of the state.
    Even more important the families of these people are denied the right to protect their children. They are innocent of any crime and are being punished by these stupid laws that have no affect on crime.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •