- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Messages
- 27,254
- Reaction score
- 9,350
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Just like all laws!
so tell me catawba. Tyrone has three felony convictions. He has four hot pieces he stole in one of the robberies he didn't do time for. So he gets out of the joint and goes and gets the guns to sell to Leroy. Now if Tyrone is caught with the guns he does 96 to 120 months in a USP under the sentencing guidelines. IF he notifies the NICS he is selling the guns to Leroy he incriminates himself.
SO TELL ME catawba how will the USSC rule when the AUSA indicts Tyrone for both being a felon in POSSESSION and for failing to perform the background check
I know the answer
DO YOU?
That is not what the expanded background check law is for. The expanded background check is to prevent felons and the mentally deranged from shuffling into a gun show in 40 states and buying a cheap gun with cash, no questions asked.
Thank you. :] I plan on posting about the suicide epidemic in the US if you wanna join the discussion. I would like to think that's not a partisan issue considering it affects folks of all backgrounds.
The far right will defend suicides before they agree to any reasonable gun safety measures.
Have you already supplied some source for this or are you merely projecting?
online advertising (which I believe already requires FFL transfer hence BGC)...of course Craigs list/newpaper classifieds transactions would be identical to that which I described...and of course you said was exempted.
LOL the ignorance in your posts are amazing.
Well yeah, but I was thinking more along the lines of requiring new teachers to take psychology/counseling so they can better recognize early signs of trouble in their students. One thing they probably will dispute would requiring or at least making it easier for folks to have gun safes to prevent their potentially troubled children from having easy access to their guns.
Well from my experience in school student counselors are only as effective as the teachers who must first recognize a problem before the student is sent to see said counselor.Both sensible measures!
Ah, so you’re skeptical that anything will pass…?You mean other than common sense about how this congress has not been known for its bipartisanship?
Nope! Google the NY sting of online advertisers for gun sales w/o background checks. What you described was single sale to a friend or family member.
Ah, so you’re skeptical that anything will pass…?
Interesting reads. Kinda seems like entrapment when a potential purchaser persists in asking questions to finally mention that ‘he probably couldn’t pass a background check’…
I didn't ask for more far right opinion, I asked for a credible national poll that proves your opinion on background checks has any more than marginal support among voters.
Name the legislation that will pass?
A little over 80% of americans support expanding background checks. With members of the NRA it's a little over 70% percent. This will pass sooner or later whether you like or not my conservative friends.Here are the two pieces of legislation I think have the best chances of being passed:
The bipartisan gun safety measure designed to curb illegal gun trafficking and purchasing.
And, the bipartisan expanded background check proposal being put together by Schumers group.
Here are the two pieces of legislation I think have the best chances of being passed:
The bipartisan gun safety measure designed to curb illegal gun trafficking and purchasing.
And, the bipartisan expanded background check proposal being put together by Schumers group.
Keeping a registry of law abiding gun owners is illegal, which is why the current NICS doesn't include registry, and why the expanded background checks will not include registry.
Apparently, only you and few other sellers are worried about the $35 fee..................
Not at all, I am skeptical of your claim that it will include a registry and that it won't include exemptions.
It would seem more like entrapment to me if he didn't say he probably couldn't pass a background check.
Because no gun control will work if not implemented federally. Listen to police chiefs in cities like Chicago and Philly. The laws in those places don't matter when someone can just drive over to the next state and buy firearms.
Neither of which will stop a single crime from occurring...
That is what 10% - 15% of voters that represent the far right believe.
That is what 10% - 15% of voters that represent the far right believe.
It appears that you are either being intentionally dense or do not know that NICS checks are done by the same folks (FFL dealers) that now keep the gun sales records. Using two related databases is simply the trick used to convince morons that registration is not the goal, that it is only a "private" function. One can say that FFL dealer records are not gov't records (like you pretend) and that they are only examined for specific things yet they are generally turned over to ATF (as well a state agencies).
http://www.nssf.org/factsheets/PDF/FFLRecordRetention.pdf
Lol! Feel free to explain how they're wrong then.
If I implied that ‘it will include a registry and that it won't include exemptions’ I apologize as it is not my point. The same article you walked out two weeks ago specifically pointed out that this was planned in the legislation. My argument is that the law will be effectively unenforceable without a registry and by including exemptions it fails the ‘universal’ part of the plan.
Actually no, the CURRENT law prescribes that you cannot KNOWINGLY sell a firearm to someone who you know or have reason to think the purchaser is ineligible. Those in the NYC ‘sting’ the seller was TOLD by the purchaser that he was ineligible. I did not see in the NYC study where the sellers were arrested and prosecuted. If we are not going to enforce the current laws why write new ones?