Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire A universal backgound check bill or law we could all support.

Yeah, OK, but that's not realistic. The supreme court has already upheld the ability to make restrictions on ownership. I have no problem with people who have committed violent crimes from being restricted from owning guns.

Not just no but hell no.

I could support none.

If you believe what we have now works to prevent crime(I don't) then a complete registry and no "loop holes" should be what you believe we should have.

I fail to see any gray area. Either you think gun laws work or you don't. I'm in the don't category and can only support less laws not more.

Ok, but have those convicted of violent crimes have other rights suspended by COTUS? Why is the 2nd special? If you want to redefine "shall not be infringed," then you need an amendment IMO. SCOTUS has been wrong before, they are only people in politically appointed positions. Just because law is defacto, doesn't make it right. What happens when the definition of "violent criminal" is defined by defacto law as something considered innocuous today? Was Randy Weaver a "violent criminal?". A slippery slope indeed.

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed"

Nuf said.

Like I said, not realistic.

I thought about that last night after we talked back and forth. There are some good things in what you posted and not a lot bad. I could go for getting some things for a change. The problem is the bad and the potential for worse even in the stuff you posted about it which neither one of us was able to fully check/vet. What we need is more common sense government. Our politicians are addicted to big government and passing needless laws that take an attorney to interpret. "We had to pass it to find out what was in it." Sounds a whole lot like "In order to save the village we had to destroy it,".

I am convinced that despite nice, juicy carrots in front of us, we need to hold the line and when the time is right, push back hard. Our "leaders" need to prove that laws will work before passing them and simplify them so we can all understand them. There are several huge problems in this country. Guns and poorly reasoned, non-working controls thereof are only a subset of the whole, part of which I just described. Our Justice System itself is [bleep] up badly. You shoot some guy who is obviously trying to do your or yours harm or even in the commission of some other crime, like theft, and it should be cut and dried that there is nothing done. I'm sick and tired of reading, "no charges were filed". Wtf? As if some should be? George Zimmerman is a perfect example. It should not break a person defending against such nonsense either...so the civil system needs reformed badly too.

No offense intended to the lawyers here, but there is no incentive for the lawyers, who themselves make up most of the government in this country, to reform things. The more and more confusing the laws, the more money in their pockets. We simply have to quit letting the addiction to legislation run (ruin actually) this country and we have to do something about the proliferation of bs that has already occurred.

The sunsetting of the AWB was a great start. How about a revisitation of the 1968 GCA? A hard look at it such as Prof. Kleck did in his landmark book, is needed. More Guns Equal Less Crime should be a rallying cry as opposed to just a book title. What about the NFA? What good does it do? We know that our borders need to be secured, yet we allow these asssclowns we call leaders to foist weak-dicks like Romney and McClown on us and they don't even get to first base because nobody is interested in their tired, sadasssed shixt. We already know if they were going to do something it would have already been done.

What we're gonna do is [bleep] around until the whole thing implodes. Our country is fixable and easily so, but we simply have to quit listening to dickweasels who are selling us out and making money doing so.

I agree that it is unrealistic in today's views, but I still think its right, and I will still base my support of politicians and my letters to them based on this interpretation of COTUS. As far as realism today, neither Washington nor Jefferson could ever get elected today, but that doesn't mean it's right.

We can talk compromise when democrat voters have to show ID. When the border is properly secure. When obama explains why he was in pakistan in 1984. When Eric Holder comes clean on fast and furious, and when the truth is known about bengazi. Until then, they can lick my nuts

Who is being "not realistic?"
Worked for over 150 years, would work for 150 more if left alone, and people didn't swallow the lies and propaganda fed em.

Randy Weaver was a victim of violent criminals who are members of a criminal organization.

Lon Horiuchi should have stood trial.

I agree, how it is and what is right are not the same. I believe we will have some form of background checks no matter what we think or do about it. If we have to have them, I want them to be for everyone, not just gun owners. Not done at time of purchase. The government doesn't need to know what type or how many guns anyone has. If they are OK to have a gun, then that is all the government needs to know.

Something as simple as a check on everyones drivers license could work. The check could be done each time you renew it and there would be no paperwork needed when buying or selling a gun. Since the check would be done on everyone, the government would just assume everyone is armed.

OK, go get background checks abolished. Tell me, how you going to do it?

Some truth along with, attitude adjustment would make a good start.
Direction we're headed? Not a chance.

I mean no offense here so please don't take it that way.

What you are saying is true if it weren't for one piece of flawed reasoning in your statement. I'm fairly involved in our local public schools. For years I've heard locals say, "it's just a matter of time before they consolidate it,", meaning the local school district. They have no clue. They've been saying it for years and guess what, it ain't consolidated.

The same goes for your statement about background checks. We don't have them now for private sales at the Fed level and we don't EVER have to have them if we stand fast. The biggest possibility right now is people who probably mean well, dangling a big enough and juicy enough carrot in front of us that we go for something benign. The trouble with that is more confusion and the possibility of the slippery slope plus the fact that nothing has worked as of yet. Einstein said that one definition of insanity is continuing to try something over and over and over that has failed in the past. There must be some addendum to that logic talking about continuing to up the ante on things that already do not work. We need to go in the different direction and the first object in turning around is to stop going in the direction we currently are going.

No new gun control. No exceptions.

What do you want to know? Repeal the Brady Bill and the current NICS system that was added to it. I mean, if you're serious, that's the nuts and bolts of how it happens.

I don't disagree in a pragmatic way, but I do in a principled one. I refuse the argument, since it is a cave in to the left's argument that it is a tool problem, not an action one. I choose to stand my ground, and try to change the argument to a more reasonable one, rather than to submit to the argument that a special class of people is required to own firearms.

We're not that far apart honestly, I'm just clinging to the intent of COTUS, and not giving credence to the fallacy that 7 lbs of steel and or aluminum creates a crime. It's the 9lbs of grey matter, or lack thereof.

There is no difference between principle and pragmatism in the end. There is only what gets done and how right or wrong it is. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

That's the problem. It is the direction we are headed. If we are not in on the solution, we will bear the brunt of it. Background checks aren't going away, but they can be moved from the point of gun purchase. No one needs to know when and how often you buy a gun. They certianly don't need to know how many and what type guns you have.