• 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!

Universal background checks

Do you support universal background checks?


  • Total voters
    104
so you deny saying that the government should have that power?

All you have to do is provide the quote from the poster and the matter can then move on.
 
.

So everything the Constitution does not specifically restrict it's citizens from doing/owning means they should be able to do/own without any background check or restrictions?

Okay.

So then by your logic, any American should be able to fly a plane or build a nuclear reactor or drive any size of vehicle/boat (including ocean liners) or sell heroin or practise medicine or sell weapons to other countries and so on...all WITHOUT ANY federal restrictions.



And where exactly in the post you quoted did I say ANYTHING about ownership restrictions?

The answer is: I did not.

I strictly was talking about background checks.

Here is PART of the quote I was discussing

It appears you did say that congress can act without a constitutional foundation

IF that is not what you intended I am all ears-er eyes

but I have to leave, BBL tonight
 
so you deny saying that the government should have that power?
:rolleyes:

What power?

And you did not answer my question...

So everything the Constitution does not specifically restrict it's citizens from doing/owning means they should be able to do/own without any background check or restrictions?

Yes or no?
 
Last edited:
Here is PART of the quote I was discussing

It appears you did say that congress can act without a constitutional foundation

IF that is not what you intended I am all ears-er eyes

but I have to leave, BBL tonight
no offence, but can you not recognize the difference between a statement and a question?

I did not make a statement in the part you quote - I asked you a question (that's why there is a '?' at the end of the sentence). And I have asked you it twice now.

Now are you going to answer it or not?
 
Last edited:
The proof is that background checks haven't stopped law abiding citizens from buying tens of millions of guns.

Show us your proof of how background checks have prevented law abiding citizens from buying guns..............

Do you have proof that universal background checks would stop criminals?
 
that's rich coming from one of your posts. You want to pass new laws that have no constitutional authority and won't even apply to many criminals. YOU have the DUTY to prove that your proposed law will actually benefit society (hassling conservatives is not a benefit btw). You have utterly failed to do that. WHEN we point out all the problems in your bill, what do you do? Do you actually bring forth empirical data demonstrating your schemes will decrease crime? NO

You do one or two things

1) Whine that 90% of the public supports what you want without any real proof

2) repeat the same crap of "extreme right wing"


Its already been proven to 90% of voters. 1.8 million gun sales have been prevented by background checks under the 1994 law.
 
Its already been proven to 90% of voters. 1.8 million gun sales have been prevented by background checks under the 1994 law.


1) yet only 277 prosecutions resulted

2) and you cannot say if those stopped were actually prevented from acquiring a weapon from another source

and most importantly-and the issue you have avoided

3) is that there is ZERO evidence that the law actually caused crime to go down
 
Do you have proof that universal background checks would stop criminals?

"From the inception of the Brady Act on March 1, 1994, through December 31, 2009, over 1.9 million gun purchase applications have been denied, up from 1.8 million through the end of 2008.

In 2009, 150,000 attempts-to-purchase by dangerous people were blocked by Brady background checks. A felony conviction or indictment was the most common reason for a denial by a state (39%), a local agency (22%), or the FBI (49%) in 2009. A domestic violence misdemeanor conviction or restraining order was the second most common reason for denial by a state (14%) or local agency (16%) in 2009.

Records of persons ineligible to possess a firearm due to a mental health commitment or adjudication increased 37% in the NICS Index during 2009; overall, the number of records in the index increased 4%."

Citation: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2009 - Statistical Tables, October 20, 2010

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence : Studies

For further documentation if you are interested:

# Memo: Examples of Guns Trafficked from Private Sellers at Gun Shows to Prohibited Purchasers
#
CSGV Report: America's Gun Shows: Open Markets for Criminals
#
CSGV Report: Debunking a Myth: The Gun Lobby's Claim That Less Than 1% of Crime Guns Come from Gun Shows

From this link - Gun Show Loophole - Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
 
"From the inception of the Brady Act on March 1, 1994, through December 31, 2009, over 1.9 million gun purchase applications have been denied, up from 1.8 million through the end of 2008.

In 2009, 150,000 attempts-to-purchase by dangerous people were blocked by Brady background checks. A felony conviction or indictment was the most common reason for a denial by a state (39%), a local agency (22%), or the FBI (49%) in 2009. A domestic violence misdemeanor conviction or restraining order was the second most common reason for denial by a state (14%) or local agency (16%) in 2009.

Records of persons ineligible to possess a firearm due to a mental health commitment or adjudication increased 37% in the NICS Index during 2009; overall, the number of records in the index increased 4%."

Citation: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2009 - Statistical Tables, October 20, 2010

Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence : Studies

For further documentation if you are interested:

# Memo: Examples of Guns Trafficked from Private Sellers at Gun Shows to Prohibited Purchasers
#
CSGV Report: America's Gun Shows: Open Markets for Criminals
#
CSGV Report: Debunking a Myth: The Gun Lobby's Claim That Less Than 1% of Crime Guns Come from Gun Shows

From this link - Gun Show Loophole - Coalition to Stop Gun Violence

How many were jailed or prosecuted over this?


And would these same stats apply in a private sale? This isn't proof about private sale. We clearly need to look at other federal attempts to block private sale to see if it is possible. Given the history of alcohol or drugs...it isn't.

Oh. Did crime go down?
 
So background checks do not prevent law abiding people from purchasing guns, as some in the far right claim.

Depends. Who so I purchase from? It limits me monetarily.
 
How many were jailed or prosecuted over this?

It is not against the law to fail a background check, it is only against the law to lie on a background check.


And would these same stats apply in a private sale?

Yes!

"Gun violence in the United States can be substantially reduced if Congress expands requirements for background checks on retail gun sales to cover firearm transfers between private parties, a new report by the director of the UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program concludes.

The report "Background Checks for Firearm Transfers" by Garen Wintemute, who also serves as a professor of emergency medicine, notes that 40 percent of U.S. gun transactions occur between unlicensed private parties, such as people buying and selling at gun shows. That figure doubles, to more than 80 percent, for firearm sales that involve criminal intent.

Private-party transactions make up an often overlooked, thriving secondary gun market that is exempt from background checks and other controls designed to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and others prohibited from legally purchasing a gun.

By creating a single, equitable structure governing all retail commerce in firearms, Congress could make it harder for criminals to obtain guns, substantially reduce firearm-related violence, and curb the large-volume gun purchases that result in firearm trafficking, Wintemute said.

The report comes on the heels of the Newtown, Conn., massacre, in which 20 children and six adults were shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Since that December tragedy, President Obama has made gun violence a top priority and is pushing lawmakers to tighten gun laws and take other steps to reduce future violence.

While shootings such as the Newtown episode intensify public concern, statistics show gun violence is an everyday, serious threat to the nation's health and safety. In 2012, there were an estimated 467,321 firearm-related violent crimes in the U.S., a 26 percent increase since 2008. There were 11,101 firearm homicides that year, and an estimated 55,544 injuries resulting from gun-related assaults requiring treatment in hospital emergency departments.

Wintemute's study provides an in-depth look at procedures governing gun purchases and the double standard that distinguishes rules for retail sales from those covering private-party transactions.

A buyer at a retail establishment, for example, must complete a lengthy Firearms Transaction Record and certify that he is buying the gun for himself and is not a member of any of the prohibited groups as defined by federal statute. The retailer must then submit the buyer's identifying information to the FBI to check for a criminal history and verify the buyer's eligibility to purchase firearms, a process typically completed in minutes.

"These procedural safeguards are intended to ensure that the buyer is who he says he is, that he and not someone else will be the actual owner of the firearm, and that he is not prohibited from owning it," Wintemute said. "They help prevent the large-volume purchasing that otherwise might fuel trafficking operations. They establish a chain of ownership that will help law enforcement authorities link the firearm to the buyer if it is used in a crime later."

A private party, by contrast, is permitted to sell guns with none of these federal safeguards in place. There are no forms to fill out, no records to be kept, and no requirement that a buyer show identification or submit to a background check.

In addition to background checks to identify prohibited persons and deter those with criminal intent, Wintemute recommends establishing a permanent record for each firearm transferred between private parties, thus creating a chain of ownership. Such records have proven to be of great help to law enforcement agencies as they investigate individual crimes and seek to disrupt firearm trafficking networks.

To maximize the potential of the current background check system, he also recommends greater efforts to improve the three FBI databases -- the Interstate Identification Index, National Crime Information Center and the National Interstate Criminal Background Check System -- on which background checks rely. Improved reporting of criminal convictions, domestic violence restraining orders and prohibiting mental health events is most important.

"The widespread unavailability of records seriously compromises the effectiveness of our current background-check process," Wintemute said. "I am actually very optimistic that the nation will adopt a comprehensive background check policy in this Congress, where there has been a bipartisan expression of support for such a proposal. Six states have adopted such policies, and we know they work."
University of California - UC Newsroom | Report: More background checks would cut gun violence
 
How many were jailed or prosecuted over this?


And would these same stats apply in a private sale? This isn't proof about private sale. We clearly need to look at other federal attempts to block private sale to see if it is possible. Given the history of alcohol or drugs...it isn't.

Oh. Did crime go down?

despite over 500 posts braying how great a UBC would be, Catawba has never come close to actually posting any PROOF that the UBC would decrease crime
 
Likewise, none of your posts proof that background checks lead to confiscation of every gun.

I don't have to. the burden is on you fans of more laws to prove your dreams will increase safety, you cannot. I can also prove that its a waste of time since you cannot enforce the laws since private owners have no current duty to keep records of what they own or have sold
 
I don't have to. the burden is on you fans of more laws to prove your dreams will increase safety, you cannot. I can also prove that its a waste of time since you cannot enforce the laws since private owners have no current duty to keep records of what they own or have sold

You can't prove that something won't work unless you try. And private sales should be responsible for keeping records of sale, given the nature of what they sell.
 
You can't prove that something won't work unless you try. And private sales should be responsible for keeping records of sale, given the nature of what they sell.

uh another fail on your part. there is no evidence that the brady bill decreased crime either except perhaps some suicides. And that fails to meet your burden

and see you ADMIT you want even more laws
 
I don't have to. the burden is on you fans of more laws to prove your dreams will increase safety, you cannot. I can also prove that its a waste of time since you cannot enforce the laws since private owners have no current duty to keep records of what they own or have sold

"Gun violence in the United States can be substantially reduced if Congress expands requirements for background checks on retail gun sales to cover firearm transfers between private parties, a new report by the director of the UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program concludes.

The report "Background Checks for Firearm Transfers" by Garen Wintemute, who also serves as a professor of emergency medicine, notes that 40 percent of U.S. gun transactions occur between unlicensed private parties, such as people buying and selling at gun shows. That figure doubles, to more than 80 percent, for firearm sales that involve criminal intent.

Private-party transactions make up an often overlooked, thriving secondary gun market that is exempt from background checks and other controls designed to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and others prohibited from legally purchasing a gun.

By creating a single, equitable structure governing all retail commerce in firearms, Congress could make it harder for criminals to obtain guns, substantially reduce firearm-related violence, and curb the large-volume gun purchases that result in firearm trafficking, Wintemute said.

The report comes on the heels of the Newtown, Conn., massacre, in which 20 children and six adults were shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Since that December tragedy, President Obama has made gun violence a top priority and is pushing lawmakers to tighten gun laws and take other steps to reduce future violence.

While shootings such as the Newtown episode intensify public concern, statistics show gun violence is an everyday, serious threat to the nation's health and safety. In 2012, there were an estimated 467,321 firearm-related violent crimes in the U.S., a 26 percent increase since 2008. There were 11,101 firearm homicides that year, and an estimated 55,544 injuries resulting from gun-related assaults requiring treatment in hospital emergency departments.

Wintemute's study provides an in-depth look at procedures governing gun purchases and the double standard that distinguishes rules for retail sales from those covering private-party transactions.

A buyer at a retail establishment, for example, must complete a lengthy Firearms Transaction Record and certify that he is buying the gun for himself and is not a member of any of the prohibited groups as defined by federal statute. The retailer must then submit the buyer's identifying information to the FBI to check for a criminal history and verify the buyer's eligibility to purchase firearms, a process typically completed in minutes.

"These procedural safeguards are intended to ensure that the buyer is who he says he is, that he and not someone else will be the actual owner of the firearm, and that he is not prohibited from owning it," Wintemute said. "They help prevent the large-volume purchasing that otherwise might fuel trafficking operations. They establish a chain of ownership that will help law enforcement authorities link the firearm to the buyer if it is used in a crime later."

A private party, by contrast, is permitted to sell guns with none of these federal safeguards in place. There are no forms to fill out, no records to be kept, and no requirement that a buyer show identification or submit to a background check.

In addition to background checks to identify prohibited persons and deter those with criminal intent, Wintemute recommends establishing a permanent record for each firearm transferred between private parties, thus creating a chain of ownership. Such records have proven to be of great help to law enforcement agencies as they investigate individual crimes and seek to disrupt firearm trafficking networks.

To maximize the potential of the current background check system, he also recommends greater efforts to improve the three FBI databases -- the Interstate Identification Index, National Crime Information Center and the National Interstate Criminal Background Check System -- on which background checks rely. Improved reporting of criminal convictions, domestic violence restraining orders and prohibiting mental health events is most important.

"The widespread unavailability of records seriously compromises the effectiveness of our current background-check process," Wintemute said. "I am actually very optimistic that the nation will adopt a comprehensive background check policy in this Congress, where there has been a bipartisan expression of support for such a proposal. Six states have adopted such policies, and we know they work."
University of California - UC Newsroom | Report: More background checks would cut gun violence

........................
 
[h=2]Retired Generals and Admirals Demand a Plan to End Gun Violence[/h]"Generals and Admirals know about guns. They've been in the line of fire while protecting our country and preserving our freedoms - and now they're demanding that Congress take action to enact common sense gun laws that will prevent violence and save lives."

See video at link above.
 
Background checks serve, generally, for a good purpose, and no one on this forum can deny that by any reasonable measure. BUT! fundamentally I freaking hate the idea of some state or federal bureaucrat somewhere out there poking their nose and keeping tabs on in every freaking purchase of a TOOL! that inherently is (and no one on this forum can deny this by any reasonable measure) an INANIMATE OBJECT! just as a machete, scissors, a kitchen knife or FERTILIZER is!!! And every single one of these aforementioned tools have been used before to kill and produce WAY more gruesome results. We dont require background checks for all of those now do we? Maybe I should bite my tongue now because Ill wake up tomorrow to the headlines on the news reading "OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TRYING TO BAN SCISSORS"
 
Private Gun Sale Loophole Creates Invisible Firearms Market, Prompts Calls For Reform

"The vast majority of states have no regulations whatsoever on private gun sales, except for vague statutes that prohibit "knowingly" selling firearms to someone who is a criminal or has mental health problems.

Experts argue that the laws create incentives for buyers and sellers in private transactions to find out as little as possible about one another.

"Everybody understands how the game is played: the seller never asks any questions," said Dr. Garen Wintemute, who has researched the gun market as director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California-Davis Health System. "At a gun show the sign on the table says 'private sale,' and everybody knows exactly what that means. It means no waiting period, no background check, no questions asked, cash and a handshake, and you're gone."

Private Gun Sale Loophole Creates Invisible Firearms Market, Prompts Calls For Reform
 
Private Gun Sale Loophole Creates Invisible Firearms Market, Prompts Calls For Reform

"The vast majority of states have no regulations whatsoever on private gun sales, except for vague statutes that prohibit "knowingly" selling firearms to someone who is a criminal or has mental health problems.

Experts argue that the laws create incentives for buyers and sellers in private transactions to find out as little as possible about one another.

"Everybody understands how the game is played: the seller never asks any questions," said Dr. Garen Wintemute, who has researched the gun market as director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California-Davis Health System. "At a gun show the sign on the table says 'private sale,' and everybody knows exactly what that means. It means no waiting period, no background check, no questions asked, cash and a handshake, and you're gone."

Private Gun Sale Loophole Creates Invisible Firearms Market, Prompts Calls For Reform

And like it or not, there's really no way to change that and pretending otherwise is pointless.
 
It is not against the law to fail a background check, it is only against the law to lie on a background check.




Yes!

"Gun violence in the United States can be substantially reduced if Congress expands requirements for background checks on retail gun sales to cover firearm transfers between private parties, a new report by the director of the UC Davis Violence Prevention Research Program concludes.

The report "Background Checks for Firearm Transfers" by Garen Wintemute, who also serves as a professor of emergency medicine, notes that 40 percent of U.S. gun transactions occur between unlicensed private parties, such as people buying and selling at gun shows. That figure doubles, to more than 80 percent, for firearm sales that involve criminal intent.

Private-party transactions make up an often overlooked, thriving secondary gun market that is exempt from background checks and other controls designed to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and others prohibited from legally purchasing a gun.

By creating a single, equitable structure governing all retail commerce in firearms, Congress could make it harder for criminals to obtain guns, substantially reduce firearm-related violence, and curb the large-volume gun purchases that result in firearm trafficking, Wintemute said.

The report comes on the heels of the Newtown, Conn., massacre, in which 20 children and six adults were shot at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Since that December tragedy, President Obama has made gun violence a top priority and is pushing lawmakers to tighten gun laws and take other steps to reduce future violence.

While shootings such as the Newtown episode intensify public concern, statistics show gun violence is an everyday, serious threat to the nation's health and safety. In 2012, there were an estimated 467,321 firearm-related violent crimes in the U.S., a 26 percent increase since 2008. There were 11,101 firearm homicides that year, and an estimated 55,544 injuries resulting from gun-related assaults requiring treatment in hospital emergency departments.

Wintemute's study provides an in-depth look at procedures governing gun purchases and the double standard that distinguishes rules for retail sales from those covering private-party transactions.

A buyer at a retail establishment, for example, must complete a lengthy Firearms Transaction Record and certify that he is buying the gun for himself and is not a member of any of the prohibited groups as defined by federal statute. The retailer must then submit the buyer's identifying information to the FBI to check for a criminal history and verify the buyer's eligibility to purchase firearms, a process typically completed in minutes.

"These procedural safeguards are intended to ensure that the buyer is who he says he is, that he and not someone else will be the actual owner of the firearm, and that he is not prohibited from owning it," Wintemute said. "They help prevent the large-volume purchasing that otherwise might fuel trafficking operations. They establish a chain of ownership that will help law enforcement authorities link the firearm to the buyer if it is used in a crime later."

A private party, by contrast, is permitted to sell guns with none of these federal safeguards in place. There are no forms to fill out, no records to be kept, and no requirement that a buyer show identification or submit to a background check.

In addition to background checks to identify prohibited persons and deter those with criminal intent, Wintemute recommends establishing a permanent record for each firearm transferred between private parties, thus creating a chain of ownership. Such records have proven to be of great help to law enforcement agencies as they investigate individual crimes and seek to disrupt firearm trafficking networks.

To maximize the potential of the current background check system, he also recommends greater efforts to improve the three FBI databases -- the Interstate Identification Index, National Crime Information Center and the National Interstate Criminal Background Check System -- on which background checks rely. Improved reporting of criminal convictions, domestic violence restraining orders and prohibiting mental health events is most important.

"The widespread unavailability of records seriously compromises the effectiveness of our current background-check process," Wintemute said. "I am actually very optimistic that the nation will adopt a comprehensive background check policy in this Congress, where there has been a bipartisan expression of support for such a proposal. Six states have adopted such policies, and we know they work."
University of California - UC Newsroom | Report: More background checks would cut gun violence

So. What you are saying is that there is no definitive proof about private checks? Or about the enforcement of them?

Are you even aware of what it would take to enforce private sale background checks? Law enforcement would have to start buying guns privately...stings. How does that work for drugs?
 
And like it or not, there's really no way to change that and pretending otherwise is pointless.

Requiring background checks by private sellers at gun shows and online is doable and would go a long way in reducing that invisible firearms market.
 
[h=2]Retired Generals and Admirals Demand a Plan to End Gun Violence[/h]"Generals and Admirals know about guns. They've been in the line of fire while protecting our country and preserving our freedoms - and now they're demanding that Congress take action to enact common sense gun laws that will prevent violence and save lives."

See video at link above.

LOL generals and admirals know squat when it comes to civilian firearms use. these appear to be a bunch of leftwing has beens.
 
Back
Top Bottom