Universal BG Check Could Have Saved Lives

[Wayne Jr]

As we've said here for years, we need to close the gun show/private sale loophole.

A clean background doesn't guarantee a clean future.

 

[TurtleDude]

A clean background doesn't guarantee a clean future.

background checks do nothing to prevent violent criminals from obtaining firearms

 

[Logician Man]

background checks do nothing to prevent violent criminals from obtaining firearms

Are you presenting this ^^^ as an opinion, or a statement of fact ?

 

[TurtleDude]

Are you presenting this ^^^ as an opinion, or a statement of fact ?

both, a study by Duke University concluded that the brady bill, passed in 1993, did nothing to decrease violent crime. Since almost no one who is denied a purchase, is prosecuted, there is nothing to stop a denied felon from getting a gun from another source. Most of those denied properly (many people are initially denied but later allowed to purchase) are not what one would call high risk felons.

 

[Wayne Jr]

background checks do nothing to prevent violent criminals from obtaining firearms

Did I say otherwise?

 

[TurtleDude]

Did I say otherwise?

no you did not but the post you responded to is a month old and stale

 

[Wayne Jr]

no you did not but the post you responded to is a month old and stale

I wouldn't know, I don't look at dates.

 

[Logician Man]

both, a study by Duke University concluded that the brady bill, passed in 1993, did nothing to decrease violent crime. Since almost no one who is denied a purchase, is prosecuted, there is nothing to stop a denied felon from getting a gun from another source. Most of those denied properly (many people are initially denied but later allowed to purchase) are not what one would call high risk felons.

Please post a link to that study. I'd like to see where the word 'nothing' was used in this study you speak of.

 

[TurtleDude]

I wouldn't know, I don't look at dates.

OK, cannot argue with that

 

[TurtleDude]

Please post a link to that study. I'd like to see where the word 'nothing' was used in this study you speak of.

You can google it as easy as I can. I don't keep some library of studies available to satisfy the demands of anti gun posters. I cited the study, you can easily find it. If you don't, then you really didn't care about the information anyway

 

[Logician Man]

You can google it as easy as I can. I don't keep some library of studies available to satisfy the demands of anti gun posters. I cited the study, you can easily find it. If you don't, then you really didn't care about the information anyway

Just say you can't/won't back up your positive claim and we move on. Your claim- your responsibility to present evidence..

 

[TurtleDude]

Just say you can't/won't back up your positive claim and we move on.

you obviously don't care nor do you pay attention because you asked the same question months ago and I posted the Duke Study. I don't have a duty to constantly look up things for people whose goal is dilatory

 

[Logician Man]

you obviously don't care nor do you pay attention because you asked the same question months ago and I posted the Duke Study. I don't have a duty to constantly look up things for people whose goal is dilatory

Pull up the post in which I asked that 'same question' about any Duke Study. I've never even heard of any Duke Study until I saw this thread.

 

[TurtleDude]

Pull up the post in which I asked that 'same question' about any Duke Study. I've never even heard of any Duke Study until I saw this thread.

I have better things to do with my time. If you actually cared, you could have googled the study in far less time it takes you to engage in these silly demands.

 

[Logician Man]

I have better things to do with my time. If you actually cared, you could have googled the study in far less time it takes you to engage in these silly demands.

Pretty obvious you made something up, or you would follow standard debating protocol and support your claims. That's what these debate sites are designed for. Everybody knows that.

 

[TurtleDude]

Pretty obvious you made something up, or you would follow standard debating protocol and support your claims. That's what these debate sites are designed for. Everybody knows that.

pretty obvious you are merely being dilatory since you could have looked it up yourself. and I don't have a duty to satisfy the dishonest demands of posters who really are not interested in the actual topic

 

[Logician Man]

pretty obvious you are merely being dilatory since you could have looked it up yourself. and I don't have a duty to satisfy the dishonest demands of posters who really are not interested in the actual topic

It's OK, TD...This isn't the first time you've refused to meet simple Burden of Proof and then went off these nonsensical claims the requester is somehow to blame.

 

[Maccabee]

As we've said here for years, we need to close the gun show/private sale loophole.



Universal Background checks would have prevented this sale, and it very well may have saved the lives of seven dead people and prevented 25 others from being wounded.

Alright, let's attach BCs to driver's licenses and allow anyone to access NCIS. Prohibited persons will be red marked on their DL just like sex offenders are marked in my state.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Alright, let's attach BCs to driver's licenses and allow anyone to access NCIS. Prohibited persons will be red marked on their DL just like sex offenders are marked in my state.

Better to stamp the IDs of those who requested and passed the NICS BGC "GUN OK". That allows the default to be no gun rights but removes any stigma from the ID of prohibited persons.

 

[TurtleDude]

Better to stamp the IDs of those who requested and passed the NICS BGC "GUN OK". That allows the default to be no gun rights but removes any stigma from the ID of prohibited persons.

do you honestly believe that will do anything to reduce violent crime?

 

[ttwtt78640]

do you honestly believe that will do anything to reduce violent crime?

Probably not, but having valid, state issued, photo IDs (conditionally) stamped "GUN OK" would allow potential sellers of guns and/or ammo to help ensure that they are not selling to a prohibited person.

 

[AGENT J]

Probably not, but having valid, state issued, photo IDs (conditionally) stamped "GUN OK" would allow potential sellers of guns and/or ammo to help ensure that they are not selling to a prohibited person.

since DLs are renewed up to like 8 years in some states, in PA its 5 and one could easily not be OK in that time span, not against an idea of connecting back ground checks To DLs and or Concealed weapons permits to DLs ( and making the national) just saying it would be better to do the opposite and mark the people that are not ok.

Also not sure what this would actually do but as long as the process doesnt burden me and other law abiding citizens i dont care much

 

[Logician Man]

Probably not, but having valid, state issued, photo IDs (conditionally) stamped "GUN OK" would allow potential sellers of guns and/or ammo to help ensure that they are not selling to a prohibited person.

^^^ Responsible gun ownership logic. :thumbs:

 

[ttwtt78640]

since DLs are renewed up to like 8 years in some states, in PA its 5 and one could easily not be OK in that time span, not against an idea of connecting back ground checks To DLs and or Concealed weapons permits to DLs ( and making the national) just saying it would be better to do the opposite and mark the people that are not ok.

Also not sure what this would actually do but as long as the process doesnt burden me and other law abiding citizens i dont care much

The reason that I favor the positive "GUN OK" designation is that the NICS BGC should be completely voluntary and all minors IDs would be stamped "NO GUN" making it appear that they "must have" failed a BGC. There is no problem with requiring the surrender/re-issue of an ID following a due process removal of one's 2A rights - no different than having a DL suspended/revoked now.

 

[TurtleDude]

Probably not, but having valid, state issued, photo IDs (conditionally) stamped "GUN OK" would allow potential sellers of guns and/or ammo to help ensure that they are not selling to a prohibited person.

yeah it would be a good CYA tool so if a gun you sold to someone is used to shoot up a bar, you can show the cops that you took a picture of the guy's ID and it said he was legal. And lots of us operate that way. I won't sell or give a gun to someone I don't know. If I want to get rid of a gun, I put it on consignment at a licensed dealer or sell it to someone I know can legally own guns because they have a CCW, or I have seen them buy guns or they work in law enforcement.