Page 21 of 23 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 227

Thread: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'[W:196]

  1. #201
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,701

    Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptic View Post
    You are splitting hairs via terminology. A the end of the day, I bet these sales are exempt a back ground check:

    -Sales conduced by somebody who does not have an FFL- and
    this person sells less than about twenty weapons per year.

    Let me educate you as to gun laws

    for most of our nation's history, people buying guns were presumed to be lawful citizens-and no background check was required. In 1993, after years of Sarah Brady's yapping (about a guy who would have passed the check and still shot her husband) the Brady Bill was passed. Congress ONLY applied this law to licensed gun dealers for TWO REASONS

    1) federally licensed firearms dealers hold a FEDERAL license that makes them subject to numerous record keeping requirements. Since they can receive firearms within interstate commerce, they are subject to federal regulations based on the FDR expansion of the commerce clause

    2) congress specifically DECLINED to make private sellers-who by federal law-CANNOT SELL GUNS INTER-STATE exempt from this new law.

    a) because private sellers do not have to keep records
    b) because private sellers may well be held not to be within the purview of the commerce clause as expanded by FDR

    so its NOT A LOOPHOLE. the standard model for most of our country's history is NO BACKGROUND CHECKS

    so you are incorrect when you call it a loophole.

    IT IS THE FFL that created federal jurisdiction to demand the background check



  2. #202
    Guru

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,899

    Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    2) congress specifically DECLINED to make private sellers-who by federal law-CANNOT SELL GUNS INTER-STATE exempt from this new law.

    a) because private sellers do not have to keep records
    b) because private sellers may well be held not to be within the purview of the commerce clause as expanded by FDR
    If such an expansion would be unconstitutional, then why does the NRA oppose it? Why not just let it pass and put the onus on the courts to over turn it?

    My guess is that if Congress passed a law requiring back ground checks on all weapons sales, such a move would stand constitutionally. The NRA is just opposed anything that might inhibit even a few gun sales.

  3. #203
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,701

    Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptic View Post
    If such an expansion would be unconstitutional, then why does the NRA oppose it? Why not just let it pass and put the onus on the courts to over turn it?
    My guess is that if Congress passed a law requiring back ground checks on all weapons sales, such a move would stand constitutionally. The NRA is just opposed anything that might inhibit even a few gun sales.

    Seriously? The NRA opposes crap that violates our rights on guns. I should not be covered by an affirmative duty to conduct a BGC of my brother or my former federal law enforcement colleague if I give them a gun

    also-this call for a Universal background check won't work (the brady bill has not decreased crime) and when it won't, the anti gunners will claim we "need" registration in order to enforce this stupid law

    are you aware of the fact that if a CRIMINAL has a gun he cannot be forced to do the background check?



  4. #204
    Guru

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,899

    Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    Seriously? The NRA opposes crap that violates our rights on guns.
    No, the NRA opposes a lot of things that inhibit gun sales and profits. They then try to make "things that inhibit profits" and "things that are not constitutional" into synonyms. They are not automatically synonyms. People are starting to realize this.

    If you don't want to do a background check on your brother or friend- don't give him the weapon, just let him borrow it. I imagine that some people would do just that. But dealers selling to strangers are not inclined to let them borrow things.

    And yes, I am aware that criminals who currently have weapons are not going to do back ground checks. A universal check, however, would impact future sales to criminals.

  5. #205
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,701

    Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptic View Post
    No, the NRA opposes a lot of things that inhibit gun sales and profits. They then try to make "things that inhibit profits" and "things that are not constitutional" into synonyms. They are not automatically synonyms. People are starting to realize this.

    If you don't want to do a background check on your brother or friend- don't give him the weapon, just let him borrow it. I imagine that some people would do just that. But dealers selling to strangers are not inclined to let them borrow things.

    And yes, I am aware that criminals who currently have weapons are not going to do back ground checks. A universal check, however, would impact future sales to criminals.
    I am not going to waste much time on refuting the talking points left wing seminar posters are given to use against the NRA. You don't know much about the laws that your talking points champion. the Brady bill was not found-by any study-to impact crime rates at all. So why would a background requirement that is almost impossible to enforce have better luck

    I sell one of my best friends a Beretta 92 (that is the commercial version of the US military handgun) I have owned for 15 years. How are the feds going to prove that I didn't comply with the background check. All they can prove is that I bought that gun from "Shooters Supply Shop" in Loveland Ohio (a turtle endorsed business BTW) in 1999. My friend isn't going to say and neither am I. If the law is effective January 1, 2015, the sale obviously happened BEFORE THAT and without registration HTF can they prove otherwise.

    and criminals are exempted with complying with ANY LAW THAT WOULD FORCE THEM TO INCRIMINATE themselves

    so tell me how is this law going to do anything positive?



  6. #206
    The Dude
    Kobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Western NY
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    42,902

    Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    Every argument you've ever made in defense of any gun control scam proves that you oppose the Second Amendment.
    Link to one, then. Shouldn't be hard, if the evidence is so abundant.
    Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.

  7. #207
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'[W:196]

    Quote Originally Posted by darkrecess View Post
    'Gun enthusiasts' threaten woman for selling a safer gun

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/28/us...obby.html?_r=0

    Posted a couple of links. How sad is it that the NRA opposes technology that would limit the usage of handguns?

    In the words of the NRA, this might lead to "opening the door to a ban on all guns that do not possess the government-required technology."

    Except that no one at this point is even suggesting this technology be government mandated. Given the millions of legal guns currently in circulation, I am not even certain that such a requirement could even be technically or logistically feasible, let alone desirable.

    But... leaving that aside for a moment, how deluded are people if they think that this is the beginning of some kind of gun-armageddon? No one is suggesting you give up normal guns, no one is suggesting that we get rid of them. This is just one way of protecting people from gun-related accidents and tragedies. In the words of the Daily Kos article,
    You don't get it, do you?

    The 2nd Amendment was included in the constitution to protect our freedom

    Like the freedom to threaten a businesswoman because wingnuts don't like the product she's selling
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  8. #208
    User
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    07-13-14 @ 04:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    120

    Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    So why would a background requirement that is almost impossible to enforce have better luck
    For all gun retailers, you would perform a background check prior to completing the transaction. No background check = no weapon sold. How is that impossible to enforce?

    I sell one of my best friends a Beretta 92 (that is the commercial version of the US military handgun) I have owned for 15 years. How are the feds going to prove that I didn't comply with the background check.
    It's harmless, until your friend (or someone else's friend) becomes the next Adam Lanza. Then, when they track the handgun and find, oh ****, it's registered to you, the cops are gonna come after you, wanting to know how and why your friend got your gun. Since the registration can't change hands without the background check, the gun would still be registered to you, and you can be held liable for anything he does with it. It's a responsibility measure - when law-abiding gun owners find that they can be busted for failing to secure their weapons, they will take more care with them (including who they loan them out to). Thus, less guns in the hands of bad guys, because it becomes harder for them to acquire them. If you can't buy a gun commercially, and you can't buy a gun at a gunshow, and you don't know anyone willing to loan out their weapons, how exactly do bad guys get guns? It's possible, sure, but it becomes a lot harder and a lot more expensive.

  9. #209
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,985

    Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

    Quote Originally Posted by darkrecess View Post
    For all gun retailers, you would perform a background check prior to completing the transaction. No background check = no weapon sold. How is that impossible to enforce?



    It's harmless, until your friend (or someone else's friend) becomes the next Adam Lanza. Then, when they track the handgun and find, oh ****, it's registered to you, the cops are gonna come after you, wanting to know how and why your friend got your gun. Since the registration can't change hands without the background check, the gun would still be registered to you, and you can be held liable for anything he does with it. It's a responsibility measure - when law-abiding gun owners find that they can be busted for failing to secure their weapons, they will take more care with them (including who they loan them out to). Thus, less guns in the hands of bad guys, because it becomes harder for them to acquire them. If you can't buy a gun commercially, and you can't buy a gun at a gunshow, and you don't know anyone willing to loan out their weapons, how exactly do bad guys get guns? It's possible, sure, but it becomes a lot harder and a lot more expensive.
    or here is a thought, criminals sometimes purchase their guns leagally.
    "If you can't stand the way this place is, Take yourself to higher places!"
    Break, By Three days grace

    Hilliary Clinton/Tim Kaine 2016

  10. #210
    User
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    07-13-14 @ 04:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    120

    Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    or here is a thought, criminals sometimes purchase their guns leagally.
    Currently, yes, because of the gun show loophole (among others). What is being proposed is to further narrow the ability of would-be criminals to purchase guns. Have a violent felony on record? No gun. History of mental illness? No gun. Domestic violence conviction? No gun. Currently, not all weapons sold in the US are subject to a background check. The proposed law would require a background check before the successful completion of a firearms purchase, thus minimizing the likelihood of a criminal getting a gun legally. Then it becomes much harder for a would-be criminal to obtain a firearm, which does impact crime rate. States with broader background check laws also enjoy lower gun violence rates, on average. Guns with minimal gun safety laws enjoy higher gun violence rates. It's simple statistics.

Page 21 of 23 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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