Obama: executive action to expand background checks
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-12-2015, 07:14 AM
RE: Obama: executive action to expand background checks
(14-12-2015 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(13-12-2015 10:30 PM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  If the government wants to implement universal background checks they need include provisions within the regulations that allow a unlicensed individual to transfer a gun to another unlicensed individual.

Is it unreasonable to require all gun owners to be licenced?

Reasonable has little to do with the outcome...

The only people who will register their guns (if required) are the law abiding sort --- who were never the problem in the first place.

......

When you can figure out how to get CRIMINALS to volunteer to register their guns - you'll be on to something.......... Somehow, I don't see this happening...

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-12-2015, 07:50 AM
RE: Obama: executive action to expand background checks
(14-12-2015 12:24 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(13-12-2015 10:30 PM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  What I don't want to see is the elimination of private sales. If the government wants to implement universal background checks they need include provisions within the regulations that allow a unlicensed individual to transfer a gun to another unlicensed individual. I don't care if they require FFL holders or local law enforcement to perform the background check service for a fee on a private sale as long as they include a method to do it without first transferring the gun to a third party.

Treat it like a car, just make it part of the registration process.

Transferring the ownership of a car requires that the new owner register the vehicle in their name. Do the same for firearms, and have that point of contact with the government be where they also perform the background check. Transferring a car requires the use of a notary, maybe they could be co-opted for this role as well? Maybe it's something gun-shops could also be setup to handle as well?

I don't think that registration, background checks, or liability insurance are 'undue burdens' on the Second Amendment; any more so than I think libel laws or truth in advertising regulations are 'undue burdens' on the freedom of speech granted by the First Amendment. No right is absolute, they all have limits; and those boundaries are going to be tested and adjusted as needed, as indeed they should be with changes in society.

I don't know about where you live, but around here registration of a car is the responsibility of the buyer. The seller has no part in the process other than providing the buyer with a signed title and bill of sale. It is also optional. You don't have to do it unless you plan on operating the vehicle on public roads. Insuring a gun buyer can legally own a gun would have to be the responsibility of the seller. But yes, requiring both the seller and the buyer to go to a local licensing office so they can perform a background check on the buyer is the type of thing that needs to be put in place before implementing universal background checks. Implementing that kind of thing takes time and money, and I doubt the president has the legal authority to require the states to do it via executive order.

As far as insurance goes what would such a policy cover? Intentionally shooting someone? Donald Trump might be able to afford to buy such a policy, but for 99.9% of us the cost of a policy like that would effectively make gun ownership an impossibility. That's important because unlike car ownership gun ownership is a constitutionally protected right. The government can't burden that right with regulations that would effectively eliminate it for the vast majority of the population. The old couple living off a fixed income of $1000 a month in social security has the same right to own a gun as Mr. Trump. While they can save up the $75 for a functional 50 year old H&R 32 revolver plus a $25 NICs fee. Requiring them to carry a liability policy that costs $1200 a month is an undue burden on them.

Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.

[Image: anigrey.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Popeye's Pappy's post
14-12-2015, 08:23 AM
Obama: executive action to expand background checks
[Image: bcc397cd64843348ec0724d518af5081.jpg]

Not to mention they were thinking about a "well regulated militia", not any Joe Blow armed with heavy artillery. Drinking Beverage

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Erxomai's post
14-12-2015, 08:39 AM
RE: Obama: executive action to expand background checks
(14-12-2015 08:23 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  [Image: bcc397cd64843348ec0724d518af5081.jpg]

What firearm has that rate of fire? Consider

Quote:Not to mention they were thinking about a "well regulated militia", not any Joe Blow armed with heavy artillery. Drinking Beverage

The militia consists of all the Joe Blows.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-12-2015, 08:39 AM
RE: Obama: executive action to expand background checks
(14-12-2015 08:23 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  [Image: bcc397cd64843348ec0724d518af5081.jpg]

Not to mention they were thinking about a "well regulated militia", not any Joe Blow armed with heavy artillery. Drinking Beverage

And we went to war with the British not because they taxed tea -- but the British wanted to take away our RIFLED guns -- the "assault weapon" -AKA military style weaponry, of the day......

They thought civilians shouldn't own such advanced weaponry....

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-12-2015, 09:49 AM
RE: Obama: executive action to expand background checks
(14-12-2015 07:14 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  
(14-12-2015 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  Is it unreasonable to require all gun owners to be licenced?

Reasonable has little to do with the outcome...

The only people who will register their guns (if required) are the law abiding sort --- who were never the problem in the first place.

......

When you can figure out how to get CRIMINALS to volunteer to register their guns - you'll be on to something.......... Somehow, I don't see this happening...

Licensing owners and registering firearms are separate issues.

Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.

[Image: anigrey.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-12-2015, 10:16 AM
RE: Obama: executive action to expand background checks
(14-12-2015 08:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-12-2015 08:23 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  [Image: bcc397cd64843348ec0724d518af5081.jpg]

What firearm has that rate of fire? Consider

Quote:Not to mention they were thinking about a "well regulated militia", not any Joe Blow armed with heavy artillery. Drinking Beverage

The militia consists of all the Joe Blows.

An Ak-47 with a standard magasine has 30 rounds and can be emptied in about 3 seconds in full automatic. Other wepaon of that class have a similar rate of fire on full automatic. Which gives you about 10 rounds per second. The famous Uzi also has a similar fire rate. In short, a single soliders today has the firepower of a bit over 200 soldiers of the 1800th century (about three shots per minutes for the well trained ones, a single one for your traditionnal militia men). I hope this help you a bit.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-12-2015, 10:24 AM
RE: Obama: executive action to expand background checks
(14-12-2015 09:49 AM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  
(14-12-2015 07:14 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  Reasonable has little to do with the outcome...

The only people who will register their guns (if required) are the law abiding sort --- who were never the problem in the first place.

......

When you can figure out how to get CRIMINALS to volunteer to register their guns - you'll be on to something.......... Somehow, I don't see this happening...

Licensing owners and registering firearms are separate issues.

Nice dodge....

You're still overlooking the fact -- yes - FACT -- that the only people that will comply with registering either themselves or their firearms are the LAW ABIDING citizens....

Criminals and whackos, as usual will just keep on doing what they do....

So all your wonderful plans amount to naught...

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-12-2015, 10:26 AM
RE: Obama: executive action to expand background checks
(14-12-2015 10:16 AM)epronovost Wrote:  
(14-12-2015 08:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  What firearm has that rate of fire? Consider


The militia consists of all the Joe Blows.

An Ak-47 with a standard magasine has 30 rounds and can be emptied in about 3 seconds in full automatic. Other wepaon of that class have a similar rate of fire on full automatic. Which gives you about 10 rounds per second. The famous Uzi also has a similar fire rate. In short, a single soliders today has the firepower of a bit over 200 soldiers of the 1800th century (about three shots per minutes for the well trained ones, a single one for your traditionnal militia men). I hope this help you a bit.

If an active shooter intent on staying somewhat mobile decides to go full auto, it would just make it easier to take him down. He'd hit less people per shot, would spend more time reloading than shooting, and would either quickly run out of ammo or be slowed down so much that he'd be vulnerable without a supporting rifleman.

I could convert my Vector or my M4 to full auto, or my AK back to full auto (I picked it up as a full auto in Iraq but had to put it back together as a semi in order for it to be legal once I brought it back to the states) in a matter of minutes, but would have no reason to do so whether it were legal or not. Aside from entertainment value.

The Taliban sporting WWII era Mosin-Nagants were far deadlier than the dipshits spraying their AKs all over the place hoping to hit something before they ran out of ammo or their guns jammed.

No larger point for the debate, really. Just random yak thoughts.

'Murican Canadian
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-12-2015, 10:28 AM
RE: Obama: executive action to expand background checks
(14-12-2015 10:16 AM)epronovost Wrote:  
(14-12-2015 08:39 AM)Chas Wrote:  What firearm has that rate of fire? Consider


The militia consists of all the Joe Blows.

An Ak-47 with a standard magasine has 30 rounds and can be emptied in about 3 seconds in full automatic. Other wepaon of that class have a similar rate of fire on full automatic. Which gives you about 10 rounds per second. The famous Uzi also has a similar fire rate. In short, a single soliders today has the firepower of a bit over 200 soldiers of the 1800th century (about three shots per minutes for the well trained ones, a single one for your traditionnal militia men). I hope this help you a bit.

Show me a bunch of guys with single shots shooting - and they're likely to hit what they're aiming at most of the time....

Show me some guy emptying out an AK-47 in one burst - and I'll show you a guy that just wasted a whole lot of ammo -- hitting nothing he was aiming at...

So, don't give me this "power of 200" bullshit.....

Because that's what it is -- -bullshit.....


What makes ANY firearm deadly is the skill and will of a competent shooter.

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: