View Poll Results: Do you support universal background checks?

Voters
149. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    68 45.64%
  • No

    81 54.36%
Page 3 of 77 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 764

Thread: Universal background checks

  1. #21
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Universal background checks

    So far, in this thread, only two have posted statements to the effect that yes, they support the “universal background check”, though a few others have made postings which seem to imply support.

    I think it is very telling that the only two to come out and clearly say that they support both specify their “lean” as “Socialist”. Not surprising in the least, of course, but quite telling.
    Last edited by Bob Blaylock; 02-25-13 at 02:50 AM. Reason: A man without a forklift is nothing. May the Forks be with you.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: Universal background checks

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    If that was really true, then there would be no difficulty at all in getting the Constitution amended in order to supersede the Second Amendment, and to allow the right affirmed therein to be infringed to the degree of requiring these checks as a prerequisite for exercising that right. That no credible effort has been made to propose such an amendment proves that those who claim there is this much support are flat-out lying.
    You have no way of knowing is they are 'lying' or not.

    'lie 2 (l)
    n.
    1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
    2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.
    '

    Lie - definition of Lie by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.


    To lie requires intent. Since you cannot possibly know what their inent was (unless they inform you), then there is no possible way you can know if they are lying or not.

    They may just be relaying information that is false - without their knowledge that it is false.

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: Universal background checks

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    So far, in this thread, only two have posted statements to the effect that yes, they support the “universal background check”, though a few others have made postings which seem to imply support.

    I think it is very telling that the only two to come out and clearly say that they support both specify their “lean” as “Socialist”. Not surprising in the least, of course, but quite telling.

    Well, your theory just got blown up because I am definitely for background checks.

    And I lean towards Libertarianism in most things (free market, return to gold standard, end the fed/Fannie/Freddie, legalize drugs, small government, minimal regulations, balanced budget) - though not this one obviously.

    I see absolutely nothing wrong with a background check to make sure the person is legally eligible to actually own a firearm.

  4. #24
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Universal background checks

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    Well, your theory just got blown up because I am definitely for background checks.

    And I lean towards Libertarianism in most things (free market, return to gold standard, end the fed/Fannie/Freddie, legalize drugs, small government, minimal regulations, balanced budget) - though not this one obviously.

    I see absolutely nothing wrong with a background check to make sure the person is legally eligible to actually own a firearm.
    According to the Second Amendment, all persons are legally eligible to own a firearm. What is the point in a “background check” to prove that one is entitled to a right that everyone is entitled to, other than to selectively deny that right, just as “poll taxes” and “literacy tests” were used on the past to selectively deny voting rights?
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: Universal background checks

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
    According to the Second Amendment, all persons are legally eligible to own a firearm. What is the point in a “background check” to prove that one is entitled to a right that everyone is entitled to, other than to selectively deny that right, just as “poll taxes” and “literacy tests” were used on the past to selectively deny voting rights?
    That's your interpretation of the 2'nd Amendment...not mine.

    Mine is the 2'nd Amendment is STRICTLY to do with the Militia. So those Americans that are in the miltary/reserves/coast guard should be able to keep their weapons at home and buy them without a background check - everyone else (other then police, security, etc.)? Nope.

    And I could care less who or what else interprets the 2'nd Amendment like you.

    Imo, mine is right and yours is wrong.


    Have a nice day.

  6. #26
    Sage
    Dragonfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    East Coast - USA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:47 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    15,532

    Re: Universal background checks

    I've got no problems with background checks at all.

    Seems perfectly reasonable, and responsible.

  7. #27
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Universal background checks

    Quote Originally Posted by Phys251 View Post
    Roughly ninety percent of Americans support universal background checks. Do you?
    Not only no but hell no. I could care less what some CBS News/New York Times poll says, that might as well be a Media Matters or MSNBC poll.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  8. #28
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Universal background checks

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    Mine is the 2'nd Amendment is STRICTLY to do with the Militia.
    Well at least you have admitted that there is no reason to consider your view any longer or take it seriously. One must jump through the hoops of re-defining words to suggest such things. I wonder if you redefine 'press' as well...
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  9. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Where I am now
    Last Seen
    09-11-17 @ 03:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,386

    Re: Universal background checks

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    Well at least you have admitted that there is no reason to consider your view any longer or take it seriously. One must jump through the hoops of re-defining words to suggest such things. I wonder if you redefine 'press' as well...
    And you have a nice day as well.

  10. #30
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,775

    Re: Universal background checks

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    That's your interpretation of the 2'nd Amendment...not mine.

    Mine is the 2'nd Amendment is STRICTLY to do with the Militia. So those Americans that are in the miltary/reserves/coast guard should be able to keep their weapons at home and buy them without a background check - everyone else (other then police, security, etc.)? Nope.

    And I could care less who or what else interprets the 2'nd Amendment like you.

    Imo, mine is right and yours is wrong.


    Have a nice day.
    I agree, the 2nd amendment was written at a very different time in American history and referred to a very different situation, a time when there was no standing army and every able-bodied, white American man was expected to come to the aid and defense of the nation in times of need and bring their own weapons. They were the militia. Since that time though, we now have a standing army and police forces, people are not only not expected to come to the aid of the country, but are often forbidden to (you try showing up at a riot with a shotgun wanting to help the police and see what happens). Unfortunately, the Supreme Court, which exists to interpret the Constitution, doesn't have the ability to decide that this part or this amendment doesn't apply to the modern world anymore and throw it out, they have to find a way to keep everything in the Constitution relevant, even if it isn't. That's what they get paid for. So they have to keep inventing new relevance, whether it's really there or not.

    Now don't get me wrong, I'm not against guns by any means, I'm against the mindless reliance on the 2nd amendment as a universal right to own anything that you want to own. I much prefer a rational discussion instead of the fanatical pro-gun side of many conservatives or the fanatical anti-gun side of many liberals.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

Page 3 of 77 FirstFirst 123451353 ... 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
  •