INGO'ers REQUIRE background checks??

[grogie]

Like the rest of gun control, it only controls the law-abiding. That's why I voted no.

 

[hondatech2k2]

Not just no.....but HELL NO

 

[Shoots4Fun]

I voted Yes. Not because I believe their should be background checks on all purchases, but this is an area I am willing to concede, if this is the only thing I have to.

I do not agree with conceding on an AWB, mag restrictions of any types, registration, etc. I also think there should be no restrictions or registrations for Suppressors, SBR's, Machine Guns, etc.

But as a law abiding citizen, if they want to use a background check not to register my purchase, but to prove I'm not a felon or reported crazy, I'll do it.

 

[Bill B]

If you voted yes, you should be using this every time:
Indiana State Police - Limited Criminal History Search

 

[singlestacksig]

background checks are a good idea, if only they could be done by something other than the government.. IF people were really interested in keeping restricted persons from getting guns they need to have a way for the average Joe to know if a person is a felon or other prohibited person, with out having to go to a FFL and filling out paperwork on the gun ..

 

[LEaSH]

If you voted yes, you should be using this every time:
Indiana State Police - Limited Criminal History Search

I'd love to know who voted yes. I'd never sell them a damn thing.

 

[Bunnykid68]

background checks are a good idea, if only they could be done by something other than the government.. IF people were really interested in keeping restricted persons from getting guns they need to have a way for the average Joe to know if a person is a felon or other prohibited person, with out having to go to a FFL and filling out paperwork on the gun ..

If they can walk up to me and are a free person they should be able to buy and own anything other free persons can. Not make me a criminal too because I sold them an inanimate object

 

[Cottong2001]

No. If you give a mouse a cookie...we've seen where that gets us.

 

[NomadS]

it is backdoor registration. They will keep a list and eventually use it to confiscate. Call your congress critters and make sure they know ANY additional restrictions on the second amendment should not be considered.

 

[Spazzmodicus]

What is a "proper person"? If they're not in jail, they should be allowed to own a firearm. It's a Right guaranteed by the Constitution. If they're too dangerous to own a firearm, why'd you let them out of prison? Either they've paid their debt or they haven't.

Here here. It also wouldn't surprise me if there were schemes being established to make felons out of just about anybody at the drop of a hat. That's one way to thin down the ranks of gun owners.

Somebody see's a chance to make a few bucks and goes for it(hypothetically). Gets informed by law enforcement or somebody in the judicial system that a felony was committed and now said guy has to pay. Didn't hurt anybody, but now he's a felon.

I know the NRA has their hands full right now but does anybody have any idea if they have anybody in their wings remotely concerned about returning rights to those whom have done their time, paid their debts back to society?

I know somebody in this category. Goofed up when he was 16. Got stuck with a felony. Family man today with wife and kids that dreams about being legally able to own firearms one day..

 

[IndyDave1776]

background checks are a good idea, if only they could be done by something other than the government.. IF people were really interested in keeping restricted persons from getting guns they need to have a way for the average Joe to know if a person is a felon or other prohibited person, with out having to go to a FFL and filling out paperwork on the gun ..

If they wanted a workable solution, why not have a background check in which you could input a drivers license or social security number and get back a yes or no answer (as opposed to their biography) on whether the person is a 'proper' person? In reality, it would do little more than assuage the conscience of the seller knowing that he did as much due diligence as can be done, but it would be minimally invasive to the point of not declaring to the .gov why the check was being done. After all, you could simply be an employer verifying that your applicant is being truthful about not being a felon.

 

[K_W]

Requiring back ground checks on all transactions is just a baby step towards registration. I would feel confident betting money they do save the 4473 records on the Fed side, despite a promise not to... track private sales the same way and in a one generation you have defacto registration of 85-90% of all gun owners.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Here here. It also wouldn't surprise me if there were schemes being established to make felons out of just about anybody at the drop of a hat. That's one way to thind down the ranks of gun owners.

Somebody see's a chance to make a few bucks and goes for it(hypothetically). Gets informed by law enforcement or somebody in the judicial system that a felony was committed and now said guy has to pay. Didn't hurt anybody, but now he's a felon.

I know the NRA has their hands full right now but does anybody have any idea if they have anybody in their wings remotely concerned about returning rights to those whom have done their time, paid their debts back to society?

I know somebody in this category. Goofed up when he was 16. Got stuck with a felony. Family man today with wife and kids that dreams about being legally able to own firearms one day..

I know a few people like this.

 

[Spazzmodicus]

I believe most gunowners want more background checks. Anything for that warm fuzzy feeling Big Brother can give you.

You must be talking about the friction caused by an absence of Vaseline.

 

[NomadS]

The only thing I'm surprised about thus far is that "yes" as even reached 20%...

Surprised? I am distraught .. what is wrong with these people? It will not stop criminals from getting and using weapons.. No law stops them, that is why they are called criminals. All it does is put the law abiding further under the thumb of a centralized and controlling government.

 

[LEaSH]

it is backdoor registration. They will keep a list and eventually use it to confiscate. Call your congress critters and make sure they know ANY additional restrictions on the second amendment should not be considered.

This man speaks the truth.

UBC are not about safeguarding gun possession. UBC are about controlling us for future pickings. I can't stress it enough.

 

[Warrior]

Gun owners who are serious about protecting their rights aren't going to sell to nefarious types. The extra cash won't repurchase lost liberty. No checks please.

 

[the1kidd03]

Surprised? I am distraught .. what is wrong with these people? It will not stop criminals from getting and using weapons.. No law stops them, that is why they are called criminals. All it does is put the law abiding further under the thumb of a centralized and controlling government.

That and DOJ studies cite an OVERWHELING majority of firearms used in violent crimes are obtained illegally...so more checks are supposed to do what now?!?

 

[Spazzmodicus]

I vote NO. Law abiding citizens are seldom involved with violence using firearms. I do feel the use of a firearm while committing a crime should have an automatic 10-year minimum prison sentence, with a 2nd. Conviction being Life.

So you're out eating with your family. A crazed maniac comes into the restaurant swinging a ball bat and barely misses your wife's head. You shoot the guy in the leg because you were feeling compassionate and didn't want to kill him. You're tried and convicted of attempted murder and now going bye bye to bubba for 10 years leaving your family to fend for themselves.

Sorry dude but your statement sounds a bit self-righteous and left-wing.

 

[LEaSH]

It will do nothing to slow the crime...So the ****bags will want MORE - that's right, more control.