This is a discussion on Who Disagrees with universal background checks? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Anyone deemed too dangerous to have a firearm is too dangerous to be running around loose. A better solution would be to remove those people ...
Anyone deemed too dangerous to have a firearm is too dangerous to be running around loose.
A better solution would be to remove those people from society, rather than turning society into a prison.
Have we not given up enough rights already, why give up more???
When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
"Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."
Hóka-héy! Crazy Horse
If we were allowed to carry more places and made it easier for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves, we wouldn't care as much as to whether "criminals" could get guns. A criminal can easily obtain a knife, baseball bat, hammer, or some other object to terrorize others without a background check.
As of right now, I'm against all background checks for firearms.
"For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." - Ephesians 2:8-9
“The purpose of the law is not to prevent a future offense, but to punish the one actually committed” - Ayn Rand
What they should do when they capture/ arrest someone that has used a gun in a crime is to check to see if he/ she had a background checked by the NICS when he/ she purchased or stole the weapon. If not, tack 5 years onto their jail time. LOL
Criminals don't buy guns at the LGS nor do felons by guns at gun shows, the present system is a means to relieve the gun seller of any future liability and to meet federal requirements.
Our problem is not gun control, it is our lack of a good court/judge system. Florida has a 10-20-LIFE law on the books that require mandatory jail terms when a weapon is used in a crime. Do the courts/ judges use it? No. Most cases are plea bargained and the bad guy is on the streets after serving less 85% or less of his jail term.
Edit: Hell, they don't even have to confiscate. Eventually they just end the production/manufacture. Eventually, the market will dry up and there will be nothing to buy in the first place.
Maybe you should do some research and see how many law abiding citizens are mistakenly denied gun purchases. Some people get delayed every time they try to purchase a gun even though they have never been arrested or charged with a crime
I like the idea of Universal Background Checks. HOWEVER in order to enforce mandatory background checks of private transactions would require a registration database proving that a background check was run before the firearm was sold. I, like many others in this forum, am firmly against a national registry that lets the gov't or any hacker know exactly what type of and how many firearms I own. Therefore I am against Universal Background Checks.
I have only bought or sold guns with people I personally know VERY well from a personal transaction not requiring a FFL. And I have refused to entertain otherwise. I don't need a govt mandate requiring a dealer, system, and cost. Why? Because 96% of the guns used in crime are not obtained or owned legally. Thugs won't comply, crime won't go down, and the govt is in your business. Registration doesn't prevent stolen cars, neither will it guns.
Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.
Do you really believe people with those banned firearms would be closed mouth sissies? Do you really believe people that own firearms are wimps? If I was one of those first people, I'd use every method necessary to spread the information. What the hell man? Do you really think firearm owning Americans are wimps?
Wow I thought this would be at least 50/50...