• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

Thunder said:
just goes to show you how Mexico is anarchy on steroids. their society will be hell until they can control their gun sales.
Click to expand...

actually its due to their drug industry which creates violence and corruption
 
TurtleDude said:
actually its due to their drug industry which creates violence and corruption
Click to expand...

Actually it's due to OUR drug consumption/illegalization problem ... as well as our weak gun laws.
 
AdamT said:
Actually it's due to OUR drug consumption/illegalization problem ... as well as our weak gun laws.
Click to expand...


you have a point due to our consumption

does that tell you something about how your dream for more gun laws would be a failure?
 
TurtleDude said:
you have a point due to our consumption

does that tell you something about how your dream for more gun laws would be a failure?
Click to expand...

I am not suggesting that more gun laws would eliminate the problem of gun violence. But it would lessen the problem to a degree, and make it easier to apprehend more perpetrators.
 
AdamT said:
I am not suggesting that more gun laws would eliminate the problem of gun violence. But it would lessen the problem to a degree, and make it easier to apprehend more perpetrators.
Click to expand...

I am not willing to have my constitutional rights further violated to further such speculation
 
TurtleDude said:
I am not willing to have my constitutional rights further violated to further such speculation
Click to expand...

I'm not willing to have your constitutional rights violated, either. Fortunately, closing the gun show loophole would not violate anyone's rights.
 
AdamT said:
I'm not willing to have your constitutional rights violated, either. Fortunately, closing the gun show loophole would not violate anyone's rights.
Click to expand...

there is no gun show loophole. years ago no one had to do background checks. that law was changed to make licensed dealers since they receive guns in interstate commerce. try again
 
AdamT said:
I'm not willing to have your constitutional rights violated, either. Fortunately, closing the gun show loophole would not violate anyone's rights.
Click to expand...

What part of “…shall not be infringed” is it that you do not understand?

What do you think the word “infringed” means as it is used in the Second Amendment?
 
the libs don't seem to understand that the mayor violated several gun laws and he wasn't prosecuted If clear violators aren't going to be prosecuted under current laws why should any of us who don't violate the laws=even the really stupid ones like the ones Bloomturd has in his city-why should we agree to anymore
 
Bob Blaylock said:
What part of “…shall not be infringed” is it that you do not understand?

What do you think the word “infringed” means as it is used in the Second Amendment?
Click to expand...

What part of constitutional law don't you understand? Apparently most of it. The Supreme Court has repeatedly, and consistently held that even fundamental rights can be constrained if there is an important government interest, the law is narrowly tailored, etc.
 
TurtleDude said:
there is no gun show loophole. years ago no one had to do background checks. that law was changed to make licensed dealers since they receive guns in interstate commerce. try again
Click to expand...

Of course there is a gun show loophole. Drop the stupid semantic games.
 
AdamT said:
What part of constitutional law don't you understand? Apparently most of it. The Supreme Court has repeatedly, and consistently held that even fundamental rights can be constrained if there is an important government interest, the law is narrowly tailored, etc.
Click to expand...

yet no one has come close to proving the gun laws you want meet that test.

try again
and you have until tomorrow

the narrowly tailored bit is going to be tough as well
 
AdamT said:
Of course there is a gun show loophole. Drop the stupid semantic games.
Click to expand...

stop your lying-what law is different for gun shows compared to any other transaction or location?
 
TurtleDude said:
yet no one has come close to proving the gun laws you want meet that test.

try again
and you have until tomorrow

the narrowly tailored bit is going to be tough as well
Click to expand...

Well, given that it hasn't been tried, I will concede that it hasn't been proven. But IMO it would be a no brainer. Laws prohibiting felons from purchasing guns have been upheld. BG checks make it more difficult for felons to obtain guns. The gun show loophole is a huge gap in the BG check program. There is no other way to close the gap in the program. By providing wider access to the BG check system, the process would not be overly burdensome. Ergo....
 
Bob Blaylock said:
The sad thing is that New York City is so predominantly populated by Thunderously-stupid people that Bloomberg's corrupt antics will probably help get him reelected.
Click to expand...

Thunder said:
how pathetic & sad.
Click to expand...

Thunder said:
oh, if I was a terrorist, I would totally come to the USA.

here in the USA, a wanna-be terrorist can buy all the ****ing guns and ammo he wants. hell, he can even get his hands on a fully-automatic rifle if he makes nice with his local Sheriff.

just respond to some gun-sale ad in a paper in the Southwest, and go to the guy's house and buy whatever gun you like. no background check required or done.

then, walk down to the nearest Mall, and massacre the shoppers.

the USA surely is heaven-on-Earth, for terrorists.
Click to expand...

Thunder said:
u have to pick a specific country to analyze the situation correctly.
Click to expand...

Quod erat demonstrandum.



—————
67122321d1329029962-thunders-thunderdome-thunder-suck-foolhaiku.gif

—————
 
AdamT said:
Well, given that it hasn't been tried, I will concede that it hasn't been proven. But IMO it would be a no brainer. Laws prohibiting felons from purchasing guns have been upheld. BG checks make it more difficult for felons to obtain guns. The gun show loophole is a huge gap in the BG check program. There is no other way to close the gap in the program. By providing wider access to the BG check system, the process would not be overly burdensome. Ergo....
Click to expand...
what is the gun show loophole? there is no law that is different at a gun show than at any other place

you are not being honest or you are extremely ignorant of the laws
 
A Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) report on “Firearms Use by Offenders” found that only 0.8% of prison inmates reported acquiring firearms used in their crimes "At a gun show," with repeat offenders less likely than first-time offenders to report acquiring firearms from a retail source, gun show or flea market. This 2001 study examined data from a 1997 Department of Justice survey of more than 18,000 federal and state prison inmates in 1,409 State prisons and 127 Federal prisons.[20][21] The remaining 99.2% of inmates reported obtaining firearms from other sources, including "From a friend/family member" (36.8%), "Off the street/from a drug dealer" (20.9%), "From a fence/black market source" (9.6%), "From a pawnshop," "From a flea market," "From the victim," or "In a burglary." 9% of inmates replied "Don't Know/Other" to the question of where they acquired a firearm and 4.4% refused to answer.[21]

Gun shows in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


So, if I have this correct, Adam, and others are in here arguing that this so called 'loophole', which BTW, is not even nationwide, nearly half the states have restricting law on the books concerning shows, or private sales, but that they want a law on the Federal level restricting sales by private individuals. However, their problem that they can't get around here is that pesky Constitution, and their never ending seeming ignorance of who holds, or derives power as the framers set up our system of government.

Which is why earlier I made the statement of how communities could govern these matters for themselves, and those that don't agree to give up their constitutional rights to the overlord of liberal/progressive government can move. But see, this is part of the incrementalism that I spoke of also. The ultimate goal of any progressive, is to drain the rights of an individual as we believe them to be granted, of divine providence, and shift that to rights granted by man, and or government.

Now, when that happens, what man giveth, man taketh away.


j-mac
 
Bob Blaylock said:
What part of “…shall not be infringed” is it that you do not understand?

What do you think the word “infringed” means as it is used in the Second Amendment?
Click to expand...

what part of "well-regulated militia", don't YOU understand?

if a well-regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free state, then I guess we are not a free state as we haven't had a government regulated citizen militia in more than a century.
 
TurtleDude said:
what is the gun show loophole? there is no law that is different at a gun show than at any other place

you are not being honest or you are extremely ignorant of the laws
Click to expand...

As you know perfectly well, the gun show loophole is the popular name given to the loophole in the BG check law that allows non-"dealers" to sell guns without background checks. How does feigning ignorance advance your argument?
 
j-mac said:
So, if I have this correct, Adam, and others are in here arguing that this so called 'loophole', which BTW, is not even nationwide, nearly half the states have restricting law on the books concerning shows, or private sales, but that they want a law on the Federal level restricting sales by private individuals. However, their problem that they can't get around here is that pesky Constitution, and their never ending seeming ignorance of who holds, or derives power as the framers set up our system of government.

Which is why earlier I made the statement of how communities could govern these matters for themselves, and those that don't agree to give up their constitutional rights to the overlord of liberal/progressive government can move. But see, this is part of the incrementalism that I spoke of also. The ultimate goal of any progressive, is to drain the rights of an individual as we believe them to be granted, of divine providence, and shift that to rights granted by man, and or government.

Now, when that happens, what man giveth, man taketh away.


j-mac
Click to expand...

The question is simply whether individuals should be required to pass a background check before purchasing from a private seller as they are presently required to do when they purchase from a registered dealer.

My opinion is that most gun rights advocates are hypocrites and/or lack the courage of their convictions. They will argue that even moderate government restrictions on gun ownership are unconstitutional ... BUT they claim to support the law that prohibits the sale of guns to convicted felons ... BUT they oppose background checks that are necessary to enforce the prohibition on gun sales to felons.

And my challenge is this: if you argue that restrictions on gun sales are unconstitutional, have the courage of your convictions and oppose the restrictions on gun sales to felons. If, on the other hand, you concede that the government should try to limit gun sales to felons, have the courage of your convictions and support the elimination of the gun show (or if you prefer, private sale) loophole that guts the effectiveness of the background check system.
 
AdamT said:
The question is simply whether individuals should be required to pass a background check before purchasing from a private seller as they are presently required to do when they purchase from a registered dealer.....
Click to expand...

no one should be able to buy a gun without proof that they are legally allowed to purchase a firearm.

there are three ways around this:

a. set up computers at police stations where private gun-sellers can look up potential buyers to see if they are kosher.

b. add information on everyone's drivers license, stating if they are allowed to own a firearm. create a national website where this info can be easily looked up and updated by local authorities.

c. ban personal sale of firearms. (won't work as you can't enforce it without registration).
 
Thunder said:
no one should be able to buy a gun without proof that they are legally allowed to purchase a firearm.

there are three ways around this:

a. set up computers at police stations where private gun-sellers can look up potential buyers to see if they are kosher.

b. add information on everyone's drivers license, stating if they are allowed to own a firearm. create a national website where this info can be easily looked up and updated by local authorities.

c. ban personal sale of firearms. (won't work as you can't enforce it without registration).
Click to expand...

I think the best solution would be:

d. give (web/phone) access to individuals so that they can perform background checks on themselves and receive in the mail an official certificate authorizing them to purchase guns from whomever they want. The certificates could have a six month to one-year expiration, and would be easily renewable via a PIN number, so one would only have to enter changed inforamtion.
 
AdamT said:
I think the best solution would be:

d. give (web/phone) access to individuals so that they can perform background checks on themselves and receive in the mail an official certificate authorizing them to purchase guns from whomever they want. The certificates could have a six month to one-year expiration, and would be easily renewable via a PIN number, so one would only have to enter changed inforamtion.
Click to expand...

naaa...just add firearms info on drivers licenses. since we all have them, its the cheapest & most efficient solution.

add a national database for private sellers to see if that drivers license is allowed to buy a gun.

but of course, this won't stop criminals from selling guns. :(

but at least it will help the average Joe know for sure if he is selling a gun to a good guy.
 
Thunder said:
naaa...just add firearms info on drivers licenses. since we all have them, its the cheapest & most efficient solution.

add a national database for private sellers to see if that drivers license is allowed to buy a gun.

but of course, this won't stop criminals from selling guns. :(

but at leats it will help the average Joe know for sure if he is selling a gun to a good guy.
Click to expand...

Problem there is that in many states drivers' licenses are valid for eight years or more. Someone could commit a violent felony, serve a multi-year sentence, get paroled, and still have a license that authorizes gun purchases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom