It's Time for the FFL Background Checks to Go Away

[SERparacord]

A lot of whom are non violent and never hurt anyone but the State. Now punished for life, yep seems fair.

Look at the bright side, they can get free Obama phones.

 

[mbills2223]

I didn't say anyone wanted guns in the hands of criminals. I said eliminating background checks will put guns into the hands of criminals. Who's spinning now?

If you cannot accept that the existence of the background check prevents criminals from attempting to purchase weapons you should go talk to the LGS owners who have had criminals crash vehicles through the front of their stores to steal them. Not worth the hassle if all they had to do was walk in the door and buy them.

Once they can walk in and buy them they will be viewed no differently than you and I by the left. They will be just another lunatic who bought a gun and killed someone with it. I don't want them on my team. I have a position to argue from right now. I can tell a leftist moron that no one convicted of a felony can legally buy a gun. I can tell them there is a procedure in place to prevent it and that system does work. I can ***** to the feds if they system creates a problem for law abiding citizens and demand that it be improved. I cannot demand that it be abolished, thereby opening the doors for someone to walk out of prison for murder and into the LGS to buy the gun they'll kill someone with the next day.

If some folks cannot comprehend that I don't know what else can be said. It sucks but that is the reality we live in. Denying it won't change a thing.

You seem to think that I don't understand your angle. I do. And, like stated, I've yet to advocate for the elimination of the background at present. But the heart of your argument is that we have a system to prevent bad people from buying weapons. If that is your argument, it doesn't stand up, and in my eyes it is THAT attitude that will lead to further infringement. We claim the system works when it doesn't, so that must mean we need a tighter system with more gun control...

 

[phylodog]

You seem to think that I don't understand your angle. I do. And, like stated, I've yet to advocate for the elimination of the background at present. But the heart of your argument is that we have a system to prevent bad people from buying weapons. If that is your argument, it doesn't stand up, and in my eyes it is THAT attitude that will lead to further infringement. We claim the system works when it doesn't, so that must mean we need a tighter system with more gun control...

The system does work. It prevents criminals from attempting to purchase weapons because they know it isn't going to work and they just might bring some unwanted attention onto themselves if they try. The local BATFE has no shortage of work dealing with straw purchases. The criminals know they can't buy a gun legally so they seek alternative means.

The left can spin any angle into a need for more gun control. Eliminating background checks is not going to improve our position. It will make it much easier for criminals to get guns. Once that happens and gun crimes increase in frequency we will be in worse shape than we are now.

 

[Bunnykid68]

The system does work. It prevents criminals from attempting to purchase weapons because they know it isn't going to work and they just might bring some unwanted attention onto themselves if they try. The local BATFE has no shortage of work dealing with straw purchases. The criminals know they can't buy a gun legally so they seek alternative means.

The left can spin any angle into a need for more gun control. Eliminating background checks is not going to improve our position. It will make it much easier for criminals to get guns. Once that happens and gun crimes increase in frequency we will be in worse shape than we are now.

Phylo, unfortunately I have to agree with you. If we made it so any and all criminals it would at least be a disaster for a while and it would give the left something else to ***** about while trying to continue to disarm us.

 

[SERparacord]

A lot of whom are non violent and never hurt anyone but the State. Now punished for life, yep seems fair.

So if the crime has no violence forget it. I see. It's easy to spot the Oblamer voters.

 

[Bunnykid68]

So if the crime has no violence forget it. I see. It's easy to spot the Oblamer voters.

If the crime has no injured party besides some State statute it should never be a felony.

 

[SERparacord]

If the crime has no injured party besides some State statute it should never be a felony.

Or a crime, let's just call it good clean fun.

 

[Spike_351]

If ncis checks where elimated, I would guess more criminals would attempt to purchase from an lgs since there would be no chance of them being denied.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Or a crime, let's just call it good clean fun.

Actually I am good with that, if no one is hurt other than some peoples own moral high ground, leave people the hell alone.

 

[SERparacord]

Actually I am good with that, if no one is hurt other than some peoples own moral high ground, leave people the hell alone.

Exactly, everyone should be allowed to do anything they want, any time, any place.

 

[NomadS]

Can you cite the source of the 95% false positive claim?

John Lott's Website: The Problem with Brady Background Checks: Virtually all of those denied purchasing a gun are false positives

 

[findingZzero]

Most semi intelligent criminals do not even try to buy a gun legally because of the background check system. But what if you had no check system.........

Isn't semi-intelligent criminal an oxymoron. Speaking of morons, Why don't we open up a Gunshop for the Criminal and Criminally Insane and when they show (they're usually not too bright), put them away.

 

[BigSky85]

I am amazed at the anti gun groups thought that background checks are going to stop criminals from obtaining guns.

 

[Bunnykid68]

Exactly, everyone should be allowed to do anything they want, any time, any place.

Nope, not quite. You still have to respect other peoples rights.

 

[SERparacord]

Nope, not quite. You still have to respect other peoples rights.

there you go with those pesky laws again.

 

[Bunnykid68]

there you go with those pesky laws again.

What laws? Trample someones rights, then you have an injured party.

 

[KW730]

If the crime has no injured party besides some State statute it should never be a felony.

What about the hunting of an endangered or protected species? Would you consider the animal itself to be an injured party or do you believe it's no big deal to kill bald eagles, polar bears, rhinos, etc?

 

[Bunnykid68]

What about the hunting of an endangered or protected species? Would you consider the animal itself to be an injured party or do you believe it's no big deal to kill bald eagles, polar bears, rhinos, etc?

I honestly do not know on that one. Never have given it much thought.

 

[johnny45]

What about the hunting of an endangered or protected species? Would you consider the animal itself to be an injured party or do you believe it's no big deal to kill bald eagles, polar bears, rhinos, etc?

It is a VERY big deal to kill bald eagles, polar bears, rhinos, etc.

The killing of unborn children, however, is sanctioned by the same entity that wants to infringe upon your individual rights....for the safety of the children of course.

 

[Cerberus]

What about the hunting of an endangered or protected species? Would you consider the animal itself to be an injured party or do you believe it's no big deal to kill bald eagles, polar bears, rhinos, etc?

So we are now elevating animals to the same "rights" level of humans? Mighty long leap to try and prove a point, so long you start sounding like the groups that wish to disarm everyone.

Sorry, animals right fall far after the most tiny of human rights.