Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Keep hitting this poll to ban private sales!

  1. #1
    Regular Member paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,448

    Post imported post

    And a few good comments too since the poll answers aren't comprehensive.

    http://hamptonroads.com/pilotonline

    Should unlicensed gun dealers have to run background checks on buyers?

    *** What exactly is an "unlicensed dealer"?***
    A PRIVATE CITIZEN!!!!! AAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Culpeper County, VA, ,
    Posts
    44

    Post imported post

    Done 70 y, 28 n, 2 U

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member - Moderator longwatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Fauquier Co, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,297

    Post imported post

    Now they have reworded the question but didn't reset the numbers WTF!!!
    Should unlicensed gun sellers have to run background checks on buyers?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,244

    Post imported post

    longwatch wrote:
    Now they have reworded the question but didn't reset the numbers WTF!!!
    Should unlicensed gun sellers have to run background checks on buyers?
    At least they re-worded it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Bozeman, Montana, USA
    Posts
    17

    Post imported post

    It is still a poll skewed by intentionally biased language. Any poll open to all comers is about as useless as ice skates when scuba diving. It shows the basic ignorance of the media that they even run these useless polls and act like they have any meaning whatsoever.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    phoglund wrote:
    It is still a poll skewed by intentionally biased language. Any poll open to all comers is about as useless as ice skates when scuba diving. It shows the basic ignorance of the media that they even run these useless polls and act like they have any meaning whatsoever.
    Ah crap, gotta close the thread now...






    Does this really need a sticky?


  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    well unlicensed dealer would be a criminal.. they must mean private citizens in which case absolutely NOT!.

    poll is idiocy.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    I guess we can all read it several ways. My take is they are asking....

    Should someone who is not a FFL gun dealer (Who is required to do checks) be required to do a check on someone wanting to buy a gun they are selling?

    It appears that no matter how you word it... the majority of people voting want checks to be done onthe sale.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Fairfax, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,244

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    It appears that no matter how you word it... the majority of people voting want checks to be done onthe sale.
    I'm not so sure.

    If it were worded, "should a person buying a firearm from his neighbor be forced to undergo a background check," I doubt the majority would say yes to this blatantly biased question. The trouble is, the question is blatantly biased the other way.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    ama-gi wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    It appears that no matter how you word it... the majority of people voting want checks to be done onthe sale.
    I'm not so sure.

    If it were worded, "should a person buying a firearm from his neighbor be forced to undergo a background check," I doubt the majority would say yes to this blatantly biased question. The trouble is, the question is blatantly biased the other way.
    Come on... you loaded it up using the word "Forced" and that is far worse than "Required"

    Nobody wants to be "Forced" to do anything. That has the sounds of hands on violence and making you do something you do not want to do.

    Example: The rapist forced her to remove her clothing. versus.. The rapist required her to remove her clothing.

    Nobody is stopping you from buying or selling the firearm. You can always break the law and just do it. You would be punished as you would for breaking any other law.

    Just like the seller may require you to have a background check... he may require you to pay cash. Or is he forcing you to pay cash? If you are being forced to turn over cash that may actually be a robbery.

    How about...

    "Should a background check be required for any person wishing to purchasea firearm from another private citizen?"

    or

    "Should a background check be required on anyonewanting to purchase a firearm?"

  11. #11
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    How about, "should brady background checks be required of all gun transfers, thus (1) banning transfers to those who's papers are not in order, (2) banning handgun transfers to those under 21,(3) creating a paper trail tracking Americans' gun ownership, and (4) allowing the government to stop all transfers at a moments notice by shutting down the background check system?"

    That's what this proposal means.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    How about, "should brady background checks be required of all gun transfers, thus (1) banning transfers to those who's papers are not in order, (2) banning handgun transfers to those under 21, (3) creating a paper trail tracking Americans' gun ownership, and (4) allowing the government to stop all transfers at a moments notice by shutting down the background check system?"

    That's what this proposal means.
    See Pennsylvania. Circa last autumn...

  13. #13
    Regular Member Neplusultra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Christiansburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,228

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    How about, "should brady background checks be required of all gun transfers, thus (1) banning transfers to those who's papers are not in order, (2) banning handgun transfers to those under 21, (3) creating a paper trail tracking Americans' gun ownership, and (4) allowing the government to stop all transfers at a moments notice by shutting down the background check system?"

    That's what this proposal means.
    More than just that. There has to be a penalty for not doing a background check, a go to jail card. So that private individual must keep a record or some sort of proof that he made the check, and realistically he has to keep it forever otherwise how would he prove he didn't sell it yesterday to the BG? God forbid that he should loose that record, or the government should loose theirs..., and the gun be used in a crime later on. Even if there's a time limit in the law of say three years how do you prove you sold it more than three years ago.

    It's unworkable. Punish the crime doer, severly if you must, not the good citizen!

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Cottonwood Heights, Utah, USA
    Posts
    545

    Post imported post

    Done

    Yes 42%
    No 57% :celebrate
    Undecided 1%


Posting Permissions

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