By Alan Gottlieb
In the wake of horrible shooting incidents in Buffalo, New York, Uvalde, Texas and Tulsa, Oklahoma, the gun prohibition lobby and their friends on Capitol Hill have resorted to the same rhetoric and brought out the same agenda they’ve been promoting for a long time.
Chief among items on the gun control wish list are “expanded background checks.” But the killers in Uvalde, Buffalo, and Tulsa all passed background checks for their guns. That much is indisputable because all three purchased their firearms at retail. Just how much more detailed or invasive can a background check be in order to satisfy the people whose ultimate goal is not gun safety, but gun prohibition?
“Expanded background checks” is a stalking horse talking point for the creation of a gun registry that anti-Second Amendment activists can use to ban firearms. And by the time they get around to doing that, they will know who has the guns.
Joe Biden and other proponents of “expanded background checks” use the phrase as though the country does not now have background checks, yet the U.S. has had background checks on retail gun purchases since 1998.
Biden is the man who repeatedly claims the Second Amendment, when written, never allowed people to own cannons, when in fact they could. He has been called out on this canard by the Washington Post Fact Checker, yet he insists on perpetuating what amounts to his own urban legend.
More recently, his gaffe about how a 9mm bullet “blows the lung out of the body” was just another example of Biden’s fundamental ignorance about firearms, and people trust him to establish gun policy. Seriously?
We have already watched “expanded background checks” lead to gun registration in California, and that appears to have been by design, as proponents of gun bans were unlikely to achieve their goals all at once. But if they carefully erode Second Amendment rights rather than try crushing them all at once, theoretically they will be able to lull the public into accepting just a slight inconvenience time after time until a right has become a privilege regulated into the wastebasket of history.
Gun owners and politicians faithful to the Second Amendment must remain on alert and resist these notions of invasive “expanded background checks.”
Gun owners should regard “expanded background checks” as a code name for federal gun registration.
Alan Gottlieb is founder and executive vice president of the Second Amendment Foundation, and chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
This article originally appeared at breitbart.com and is reprinted here with permission.
This is true. Background checks don’t do a thing to stop violent people. Nor will any other dumba** gun control proposal.
The solution is doing something about the violent people. Put them in jail where they belong!
wouldn’t have worked in Buffalo…wouldn’t have worked in Texas…those shootings were aberrations but follow a predictable pattern…lumping them in with a bunch of black bozos blazing away at each other with complete disregard for whoever gets in the way is a favorite tactic of the left…and belongs in a completely different category where your basic premise may well apply…
Nope, they were not “aberrations”. Both had histories that should have stopped both of these people Both had been known to police. Both had mental histories. Violent people are not peculiar to one particular color.
You should not be able to punish all gun owners because of two slime balls. If you recall, it was not the guns that killed. It was two people.
So your assumption is that guns will be confiscated? Who EXACTLY will confiscate them? Over 400 million citizen owned guns in America, and who will confiscate that massive a number of guns? How will they get rid of them? No answer because it isn’t possible.
If that isn’t possible who will amend the constitution to simply get the ball rolling? Ha, ha, ha, ha…….
This is bullshit plain and simple. 10 to the 100th power impossible. Do you think hundreds of thousands of people are going to stand aside and turn their guns over to some half-baked idiot just because? There’s that many pussies in this country? All the people I know would hide within the ranks of the CCP or BLM before turning them over to the Mighty Idiot of Oz. Please answer this question and be specific.
Do you know how much space 400 million plus guns would take up?
They’re still using baby steps, but with the spectre of losing control looming they’ll be pushin their timetable a little faster!
I am making a real GOOD MONEY ($550 to $750 / hr) online from my laptop. Last month I GOT chek of nearly 85000$, this online work is simple and straightforward, don’t have to go OFFICE, Its home online job. You become independent after joining this JOB. I really thanks to my FRIEND who refer me this SITE…..,
>>>>>>> http://Www.BizPay1.com
they want that federal red flag law…even though it makes many uneasy…universal background checks and enhanced background checks are probably not the same thing…the latter are probably more akin to your proctologist saying “we have to delve deeper” and, at the least… would involve a waiting period of some sort…changing the age requirement would seem a no-brainer [only for these type of rifles].. but there is already litigation ongoing involving that issue…changing the mag limit from 10 to 20 might fly but they’re probably too dumb to think of it or too obstinate to concede it….
all of this because somebody didn’t lock the damn door…have we learned nothing from 911?
Well the “EZ” answer to the dims is ban sales of gats to the under 21. Sure works in CHIRAQ😎🤓🙄
what bothers many is the “buy today=shoot a bunch of people tomorrow” scenario…
How are a million and half, if you add all LEOs, which includes police, sheriff’s, Border Patrol etc. going to come and collect all these firearms? I mean sure some people who are scared easily will turn them in, very few in fact. The rest of us will not comply and then someone somewhere is going to defend their rights and then what? The government will lose what little credibility they have left and LEOs will have to take a step back and decide if they are oath keepers or not. Also no all LEOs will just throw the 2nd under the bus, some will, but I doubt that the majority are willing to help destroy the foundation of this nation. Anyways, just me imagining how it would go down.
Officers today have ZERO problems taking guns from criminals and once guns are banned or their ownership becomes so hard to legally comply with that compliance becomes impossible (by design) then gun owners become the criminals that officers will have ZERO problem taking guns from.
Lots of cops will be “only following orders” for a time, but many will do what so many cops in Chirac have been doing for the last three years: quit! While following the orders of a tyrant will work for some jack-booted thugs it becomes less tenable if they know there may be someone up in a tree or on a hill 300 yards behind their stack with cross hairs on their ass!
I long ago lost faith in the police to uphold their oaths. Thats just words. They’re tax collectors with guns, nothing more.
They will have way more than zero problems taking guns. When that starts they will quickly realize they are targets and outnumbered. Got to live somewhere but when nowhere is safe….
What’s joe going to do call in the un?.
I respect the police right up till they are un-respectable.
Nope, the news will portray the gunm owner as a nut case with an arsenal and the populace will cheer “Job well done”.
They’ll get us one by one over a period of years. Mass confiscation wouldn’t work because we might be woke.
For a marsupial, you have an excellent grasp of how it will eventually play out… 🙁
If they survive their day of gun confiscation they will most likely come home to house that has been burnt to the ground with their family still in it. All over, everywhere, a never ending insurgency until one side is all gone.
^This^ is where this goes, historically speaking, in most cases where control isn’t solidified in advance. The reason people say “Send bachelors” is for one of two reasons, based on who’s saying it.
1. Some imagine they don’t want to create widows. They will but they don’t like the idea.
2. People who’ve read history know how this goes when control slips. I point to Algeria if you want some light reading on the topic, but you can look into Roman occupation of Judea too, or Ottoman control of the same area.
What happens is that enforcement agents get shot (or otherwise rendered into fertilizer), mostly at random. Just pull up to get some gas at a pump and *bang* or they’re walking across a parking lot and get stabbed. Or maybe it’s an ambush. There are a lot of bad things that can happen to them. It’s a general retaliation type of thing.
Then people pull the ID’s from their wallets and go to the address on that ID and make every person there dead too.
At the same time people who are known to be family of the enforcement agents “go missing”. Then parts of them show back up a bit at a time. A finger here, a head there…
That happens just once or twice and a whole region’s worth of government agents suddenly don’t want to follow orders. Very quickly they stop showing up for work and stay home to guard their family.
So, the people in #2 are utilitarians. They’re generally the ones sending enforcement agents and they send bachelors who can’t be intimidated through threats to the family that they don’t have.
As I’ve said before, nothing gets someone’s attention faster than bits of their loved one(s) showing up on the front porch with a proof-of-life snuff flick included as a free bonus.
This is more of problem now since LinkedIn and other socials can be rapidly captured by “the resistance” before things get spicy. Nice list to have if you’re looking to make a point.
Welcome to the “state of nature”. We didn’t get to the top of the food chain on this planet by being nice and you really, really, really don’t want the baser nature to come back out.
Keep going down the road we’re on and it will and you’ll end up with tit-for-tat atrocities on both sides. Of this you can rest assured because our nature has not changed in many millennia, we’ve just got better ways to hurt each other.
Don’t need police to round up guns, the government will out-source that job to banks, mortgage companies, insurance companies, healthcare, utilities, et al. Gun in the house…Your homeowner’s insurance just got cancelled and mortgage called. Gun in the house…Your utilities were cut off…too dangerous for their workers. You kid gets appendicitis….Docs fix it, but release kid to CPA because you home isn’t safe for him….they also decide he is really a girl and needs surgery for that condition.
The government is just like perps…where there’s a will, there’s always a way.
A banker at Wells Fargo would be unlikely to “notice” such things once someone, somewhere, retaliates against a banker for this kinda thing.
A rural bank, a couple bike locks, a can of gas and a book of matches makes a hell of a point and for under $100.
Backing people into a corner is a very, very dangerous game to play. If you like breathing and don’t want your breathing to end when you die screaming, I counsel against putting people in that position.
So did Sun Tzu.
S9
I think possum and BP are right about how it would start off but what you are saying is what I believe it would turn into if “they” really push it.
House is paid for. Don’t owe anything to anyone. Turn off my utilities I’ll turn them back on as soon as they leave. Refuse to take my property tax payments? their problem not mine. One last kid to graduate from a private hs.
My wife agrees, they can fuck right off.
“Refuse to take my property tax payments? their problem not mine.”
A modest house in Florida can be had that’s property tax free, thanks to Florida’s ‘Homeowner Exemption’. Groundwater is only 30 feet down, septic systems are the norm, and tons of sunshine for solar voltaic means living completely off-grid down here is actually possible…
Geoff
When last kid graduates we’re out of here. Haven’t decided where yet but somewhere that off grid or damn close to it is possible.
We are both about done with northern Ohio winters.
while unlikely…all possible…
well, having been through this scenario once before..and having LE give up after 2 days in exasperation…I speak with some experience…(and it’s refreshing to note the acceptance of the concept: “yes, women can lie” is now bearing fruit)…buy as many as you can, hide “em everywhere you can and volunteer nothing…a good lawyer is helpful too, preferably secured in advance…yes, it can happen to you…be ready….
Just be wary my friend for we are the last remaining stronghold of freedom. Remember in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans how LE capitulated. California, Washington and Oregon have now fallen to progressive socialism and the restrictive gun control that comes with it. Just a polite reminder.
From no background checks to purchase a firearm to background checks and waiting periods to expanded background checks to Gun Confiscation to concentration camps for anyone who mentions the word gun.
5 more months and hopefully Jim Crow Gun Control joe and his ilk will be pounding sand.
gunm
congress is under pressure to do something…anything…but time is our ally…
9mm blows the lungs out of the body wasn’t Biden stupidity.
It’s what the anti’s want to hear.
Now a double barreled shotgunm at close range, both barrels, would blow the lungs out of the body.
.38 Super was Mexico’s work around. theBiden is going to try and ban any cartridges used in the military.
possum,
“9mm blows the lungs out of the body wasn’t Biden stupidity.
It’s what the anti’s want to hear.”
These are not necessarily incompatible concepts. It WAS what the anti’s wanted to hear; it was ALSO Senlie Joe’s stupidity. It is telling, I think, that neither dacian the stupid NOR MinorIQ has directly tackled the OBVIOUS issue of Biden’s clear and accelerating senile dementia. He was dumb as a box o’ rocks when he was first elected to the Senate; he’s only gotten dumber since. And however stupid Senile Joe is, Kamala “Heels up” Harris makes him look like president of the local MENSA chapter. If these are supposed to be the representatives of the “smart folks”, we are SERIOUSLY f***ed!!!
If dems keep the house and the senate we’re fucked. Seriously.
“If dems keep the house and the senate we’re fucked. ”
They won’t, *why* the hard push for all this right now… 🙁
Geoff
If Republicans get the house MAYBE, big maybe, they will put the brakes on some of this crazy the left is doing. Maybe impeach some of the low hanging fruits like garland just for fun
We need the senate for killing any chance of Leftist Scum ™ judicial appointments.
I just visualize a Leftist supreme court justice expiring in the next two years and we keeping it open until 2024 out of spite… 🙂
Geoff
We can only hope to get the senate to.
Check out the Iranian parody of Biden and Harris. How close to the truth is it really?
that 9mm crack might be the start of an attempted ammo ban….
….if they were to ban 9mm and .223/5.56 how impactful would that be?
Background checks in California did not lead to registration. Instead a separate law (or actually laws) accomplished that. When you fill out a 4473, there is a separate form that is automatically filled out that lists all of the identifying information is included for registration purposes and submitted to the CaDOJ. California DOJ runs a separate background check in addition to the NICS. Moreover, if you move here, you are required to report your ownership of all of your firearms within 90 days. Just don’t bring your “assault weapons” or 10+ mags.
The question I would like to know, Mark, is what challenges to gun registration laws are currently in the lawsuit pipeline? And if there aren’t any, why?
It would seem to me that the the current court balance is the perfect opportunity to settle this in a way to make the Leftist Scum ™ *very* unhappy.
IE, enforce the current provision to *destroy* those records soon after they made a yes-no determination.
I believe that only applies to the feds. Cal doj can do whatever it wants with their records
The GOP is plotting with Demonrats in secret as we speak.
Yup, always have been, it’s a game they play.
theBiden is a hydra, it’s why Trump had to go, he wasn’t an insider.
I can personally attest to the fact that expanded background checks/licensing leads to confiscation. I went through it in two Countries I will not go through it here.
👍
Which countries?
New Zealand and Australia
I’m quite surprised you have to ask, Dave. Seriously.
“I can personally attest to the fact that expanded background checks/licensing leads to confiscation.”
Ross, that story needs to be told, as a warning.
Would you please consider writing it up and submitting it to TTAG for publication? They can do that anonymously…
He’s a brief summary of New Zealand. When I turned 16 the local police officer assigned to the small town in which I went to school showed up in the classroom and asked who would like to get their firearms license. A month later I had a lifetime firearms license that allowed me to purchase firearms, rifles and shotguns including AK-47s or AR’s. Handguns were strictly regulated and you had to be a member of a club and attend a certain amount of times each year same goes for machine guns it is perfectly legal to own even now in New Zealand machine guns but it is illegal to shoot them, getting approval on the other hand is incredibly difficult.
Suppressers at the time were completely unregulated and it was about 20 bucks for a 22 caliber can that was good for about 2000 rounds.
In 1990 we had a mass shooting in my lifetime license became a ten year license with a bunch of restrictions. At the time I owned a Ruger 1022 I was able to keep that (they are all banned now) but I could not keep the 25 round Butler Creek magazines I had for it unless I got an E class license which was $200 required a Police approved safe ($800 at the time) if a safe was kept in a room that had windows you had to place bars on the windows and the room had to be alarmed. Around 95 A retired police officer showed up at the house I was boarding at in Christchurch and interviewed every occupant as to my suitability to continue to hold a Firearm license and then interviewed me, one of the questions he asked me was would I use that firearm in my defense or defense of another. You cannot hold/use or keep or apply for a license in New Zealand for the purposes of self-defense that will get you blacklisted. My response to that retired officer was did you see the all blacks play last night that was an awesome game he checked the box and moved on. By the time my renewal was up I had already immigrated to the United States from Australia and had no further use for a license in New Zealand. In 2019 after the mosque massacre all semi automatics have been banned except machine guns, again legal to own very difficult to get approval you void any/all privacy rights and if they searched your house and found carbon in the breach you are going to prison. They conducted a buyback program using tax dollars on all semi automatics and a great number of New Zealanders held up their middle finger, Australia is on its fifth by back.
In Australia I held a class H firearms license and was involved in the security industry it took me two years to get all my paperwork together to purchase and carry my own handgun on duty. I also had to hold a licenses for body armor and went through two licensing structures for said body armor and would have gone through a third before I immigrated to the US. Suppresses are legal in Australia except for the few quasi-federal agents involved in professional hunting. handguns again are heavily restricted, Australia is on its fifth buyback and confiscation of firearms and handguns are becoming increasingly more difficult to own in clubs in fact I believe 45 caliber is no longer allowed.
To add some information, in Australia I was required to purchase a book from the government it was $75 at the time I had to write the date/time/make/model/caliber how many rounds of ammunition timeout/time-in in that book it had to be kept up-to-date at all times. Another agent who I worked with held the same license which allowed us at the time to employ up the 10 agents should a contract have come up that required five or say eight armed agents the approval to get handguns for said agents could take over year of course one would lose the contract. So he went out and purchased 10 Smith & Wesson 38’s The police came to his home and confiscated them he took them to court the judge ruled in his favor and for the next 14 days at 2:30 every single morning he got a knock on the door from the police and they searched his place and verified his bookwork as payback for daring to challenge the Almighty state.
You’re right, pretty scary, and oh. would they love that here… 🙁
it can..no doubt…just incremental gun control..an insidious thing that has been their standard tactic for some time now…
quote—————Just how much more detailed or invasive can a background check be in order to satisfy————quote
Yes background checks need to be toughen and toughened a lot. Police need more time to check a persons background. The current system does not allow this.
More information needs to be put into the system than what we now put in to it. A persons history of violence, law breaking, arrests for mental illness and threats, marital calls to police because of violence. Much of this information is not finding its way into the system or went it does the sale has already taken place because of the short time restrictions which are totally unacceptable.
In Japan you have 3 interviews with the Police. Neighbors and co-workers are interviewed, you must take a training course on gun safety, you must take a course in deadly force laws, you must have safe storage, all of your history is explored such as prior arrests
quote———————“Expanded background checks” is a stalking horse talking point for the creation of a gun registry that anti-Second Amendment activists can use to ban firearms.—————–quote
Universal Background checks would only be an EXTENSION of the already existing Brady Background Checks on new guns. It would start vetting “second hand” gun sales.
THE BRADY BILL HAS NOW BEEN IN EFFECT FOR 29 YEARS AND HAS NOT REGISTERED OR CONFISCATED ANYONES GUNS DESPITE THE FAR RIGHT SCREAMING IT WOULD 29 YEARS AGO. Screaming that an extension of it to cover second hand guns would do so is untrue.
quote—————We have already watched “expanded background checks” lead to gun registration in California,————quote
Again a falsehood. California’s state laws have nothing to do with the Federal Background Check law. It is illegal for California to even inspect a gun dealers Federal Records. What was passed is a new state law not a Federal Law. The Federal Firearms dealer may use his own Federal records to comply with state law or he may simply require the customer to provide the information necessary to complete the transaction according to California’s state gun control laws and of course the gun dealer must comply with Federal Laws. Any records of registration are according to California’s state laws not Federal laws.
The registration boogey man.
The Federal Government does not need registration to restrict or outright ban any weapons. Those that would not comply with any new laws would suffer arrest and imprisonment. To keep such guns would only be done by the mentally ill because no sane person would risk keeping such a weapon because you could never use it in self defense, never shoot it at a public range, never trade it or sell it without the risk of going to prison and losing ones gun rights for life.
quote—————Gun owners and politicians faithful to the Second Amendment must remain on alert and resist these notions of invasive “expanded background checks.”———–quote
The latest polls among ALL Americans show that 89% of all of the people want Universal Background Checks because of the vast pool of second hand guns now being sold to maniacs and criminals.
The latest polls huh?
Well, then it’s fact.
By show of hands, how many of ALL you Americans participated in these polls?
Dacian, you can put your hand down.
I have been contacted, but rarely…suspect most of these polls are conducted in urban areas where much of the population is concentrated….
dacian, the DUNDERHEAD, Oh please. Your Background Checks has done ZERO to prevent criminals and mentally ill folks from getting guns. You see criminals and mentally ill folks don’t abide by the law. Your putting mental health information into NICS is ILLEGAL by the HIPPA law. I tried to research your claim that is it illegal in California for police to check firearms sales records. I could find no such prohibition. Are you lying, again? Or is that still?
Here in NYS there is no such prohibition. I doubt if many other states have such. If so, list them so we can verify your allegation.
it can..no doubt…just incremental gun control..an insidious thing that has been their standard tactic for some time now…
dacian the stupid,
Yes, we already KNOW you’re a Leftist/fascist. No need to emphasize it. You don’t believe humans HAVE any inherent rights. The only God you worship is your hero, Karl Marx – the fat, fatuous fraud of a lying dirtbag, who despised the very people he PURPORTED to champion – kinda like you and MinorIQ. Lying idiots, devoid of education, common sense, and rationality. Go micturate up a cable, dacian the stupid.
Sounds like everyone’s listening to you Dacian. Especially since the nonpartisan Trace states that Americans purchased over 60 million guns during the 2020-2022 pandemic. Would you have us believe that they purchased them only to surrender them to you and the Marin County LGBQTI and whatever Militia? Let us know how that plays out.
When someone suggests “expanded background checks,” my first question is, what are you going to add to the background checks we already do?
* A fingerprint search is relatively fast and more accurate than a name search, but it returns a lot of poorly-formatted, mostly-irrelevant garbage. Someone has to read and interpret the rap sheet to determine if it contains disqualifying information.
* Juvenile records? Those are sealed under state law, not Federal. The Feds can ask but cannot compel the states to disclose juvenile information. And a juvenile adjudication isn’t a disqualifying criminal conviction anyway. A juvenile adjudicated mentally incompetent might be disqualifying, but realistically how many juveniles are declared legally insane?
* Public social media? This depends on which social media identifiers the subject provides, it’s highly subjective, and you’re unlikely to find any disqualifying information. Posing with guns and making bad jokes about melting snowflakes or the nearest school is not disqualifying. Even if you find a picture of the purchaser smoking marijuana, that doesn’t prove she’s an unlawful user of marijuana on the day she signed her 4473.
* Interviews with neighbors, employers, cohabitants, listed and developed character references? The government doesn’t have enough 1811s or contract investigators to do that. It would be a multimillion dollar project, add at least a thousand dollars to each transaction, and the backlog would quickly spiral out of control. Years, not days. Even if they mailed out inquiries instead of using investigators, that will add at least a hundred dollars to each transaction and it will take weeks to get the inquiries back, even if the purchaser knows all the relevant sources addresses and types them correctly. And all they’d get back is poorly-formatted information that almost certainly has no bearing on the legal qualifications to transfer a firearm.
* Military records? From time to time these may have disqualifying information that doesn’t make it into other systems. But it takes the military days or weeks to deliver them, and there’s no standard format, no machine-readable flags for a prohibited person.
My second question is, who adjudicates this information, and under what authority? The ATF? The FBI? The nice lady who’s just trying to sell me a gun? Right now we have NICS, which is basically a go/no-go system. When you start bringing in unstructured data like rap sheets, interviews, social media, and other records, you need people trained to interpret it and apply the appropriate guidelines to render a decision. And how long do these adjudicators get to handle a case? Are we sticking with the three day thing, or do we aim for 90 days like security clearances, or do we tell them to do it to standards, not to time?
“Expanded background checks” is too vague to be meaningful and the people asking for them haven’t thought things through.
Security guy,
Truly, my friend, you are too well-educated and too rational. You are (perhaps) making the unwarranted assumption that the gun-grabber crowd are acting in good faith, and actually WANT to reduce “gun violence”. Their goal is to impose so MANY impediments to civilian gun ownership that law-abiding citizens give up and don’t even try anymore. The “intellect” of the anti-2A Left is represented, on this forum, by dacian the stupid and MinorIQ. A brief scan of their comments should be sufficient to familirize you with their stupidity and ignorance.
It ain’t about “making us safer”, my friend, it’s about “making it more difficult for law-abiding citizens”. Verb. sap.
Not at all. I don’t care about the gun grabber crowd. They’re irrelevant. But a lot of people in the big squishy middle hear “expanded background check” and they think it’s a good idea. The term itself is loaded because it implies there’s something wrong with existing background checks. We need to explain to the squishy middle (1) there’s nothing wrong with the existing regime (other than being inefficient and a violation of the 2A) and (2) the “expanded” background check is simply meaningless rhetoric with no practical implementation. If you’re not interested in educating people that’s fine, it’s not fun and it rarely produces visible, immediate results. But it does produce results, otherwise the gun grabbers wouldn’t be pushing their propaganda so hard.
To the Lamp that went out in his head
quote—————-It ain’t about “making us safer”, my friend, it’s about “making it more difficult for law-abiding citizens”. Verb. sap.———–quote
Only a Moron like you would rant such nonsense and idiocy. Right now oh great retard any criminal or nut case can go to the nearest bar, flee market, gun show, internet chat room, news paper add etc, etc, and buy all the second hand un-vetted firepower he wants and the seller is under no obligation to do anything except take the money and run.
dacian, the Dunderhead, and you “think” that enacting “Universal Background Checks” will solve that “problem”? I have a RED HOT NEWS FLASH for you. If someone wants a gun and can’t get it legally, what makes you “think” they won’t be able to get one because of your “Universal Background Checks”? Here’s a hint. Criminals and crazy people don’t do Background Checks. LAMP is 100% correct you are just plain STUPID!
Walter the Beverly Hillbilly
Just where do you think criminals and psycho’s get their guns you retarded brick bat. They do not materialize them from Alpha Centori numb skull. They buy them second hand and stolen and that is why Universal Background Checks and Safe Storage would cut down to a trickle the guns available to people who should not have them.
Every civilized nation on the planet had Universal Background Checks and Safe Storage Laws because they work and work well. No law is perfect but we do not do away with laws against murder, rape and child molestation either. Or is this getting to be way over your pea size paranoiac brain. Assuming you have a brain.
And, you pathetic, ignorant dunce of a pea-brain, it will CONTINUE to function exactly the same way after your so-called “expanded background checks.” New flash, imbecile – criminals don’t buy their guns at FFLs. They buy them on the street, from other criminals. Just like drug users score their next hit from illegal drug dealers. How’s the “War on Drugs” workin’ out, MORON??? How about Prohibition – that was a GIANT success, wasn’t it. You are not only too stupid to insult, you are too stupid to breathe. You are perhaps the dumbest person actually claiming to be alive (since most modern definitions of life depend on brain activity, you don’t come close to qualifying). You are a pathetic joke of an uneducated moron, totally lacking common sense. But you are fun AF to abuse. Playing “whack-a-mole” with idiots like you and MinorIQ should be illegal, it’s so much fun.
dacian, the Dunderhead. Most of the illegal guns are STOLEN. Not bought in gun stores, Dunderhead.
Are you so STUPID to think that any criminal is going to go though a background check?
You’re adorable. Also more naive than the average 5 year old, as you seem to believe the authorities would act in good faith. It’s so cute, bless your heart
think what they’re really after is a waiting period…whether they’re actually willing to put in the legwork during that timeframe is questionable…probably aimed at younger people where school records, mental health issues and media posts might play into it…anyone who posts a photo of themselves holding a firearm…and who gets reported for same…would draw immediate interest..bragging about guns always a bad idea…learn to keep a low-profile…always advisable….
All true; but it doesn’t win the debate.
The sliding slope argument is easily dismissed because it hasn’t yet slid.
The inevitability of close to 100% confiscation isn’t all that objectionable to the person who is philosophically sympathetic with gun control.
What I think might register is the “Ah-Ha!” sensation you get when you describe something unbelievable. “If they pass this proposed law on . . . . ” Then what will happen is “A guy . . . ” and “then they have to drive 12 miles to a gun-shop, on a Sunday, and fill out a form and run a NICS check.”
When your audience experiences that “I wish I had a V-8!” feeling, then you have hit pay-dirt.
In all the circumstances that we loan one-another a gun, we have that scenario where a NICS-check isn’t practical. That’s the point where we can stop this “expanded background-check” fantasy.
Then, the scenario where – Sam SELLS a gun to Bob and the ATF gets the 4473 form and then kick’s-in Bob’s door – will just go-away.
Once it soaks in that “Any man may have a gun”; then why bother?
In America we can say that “Any man may have a knife” without blinking an eye; but not in England (of all places).
It’s simply impossible to prevent someone from beating a bit of metal into a knife, gun or plowshare. He CAN do it; he WILL do it; you can’t stop HIM. Better to devote the effort to something else; something not futile.
not every kind of knife…which makes no sense nowadays….
Yes, ban semi-auto rifles, expand background check, confiscate by force, register everything. Because the current background checks and the current 20 thousand or so existing gun laws and restrictions have worked so well.
So, tell us just what an assault rifle is, or how you will get the guns in the hands of the criminals already out there. Or what expanded BG checks will actually check. Or prevent someone who has already rationalized the irrational from committing whatever atrocity they desire. Murder, armed robbery, rape, and whatever other acts violence are already illegal. How well has that worked out so far? Could it be those who are predisposed to criminal activity just don’t care what the laws may be?
Anything that is being proposed will have no effect on crime, or prevent the next angry or disaffected young man or disgruntled worker from shooting up a school, theater, store, mall, jobsite etc.
Deal with the cultural and social problems, the hardware is as always irrelevant.
Confiscation has never been attempted in a country with gun ownership as an integral part of its national identity and legal tradition. Never. Which isn’t to suggest confiscation isn’t the ultimate goal of the globalist crypto-fascists – it certainly is – but any who think that American gun owners will comply with a glum “aw, shucks… okay” like Australian & British subjects is deluding himself. Particularly in today’s polarized country, which lacks the national unity of even when the AWB passed, resistance will be extreme. Their best bet is to embrace the “peaceful divorce” route and content themselves with with ruling the compliant who will meekly accept being disarmed, quadruple masking, letting their kids be groomed.
I’m sorry, how many red flag confiscations have been carried out and what percentage of them have resulted in an exchange of gunfire? I would love it if you were correct but you’re simply not. A small handful of gun owners would fight back, the rest are copsuckers who would happily give up their weapons while profusely thanking the police for their “service”, and condemning/informing on anyone who actually fought back
I don’t know how many red flag confiscations have been carried out to date. Do you?
So far in the few places where they are the law I’ve seen no evidence of red flag laws being broadly abused simply to disarm Americans without cause. If so far they those laws have been used with due restraint, that’s great but doesn’t mean the laws are just.
Regardless, what red flag laws have been used for to date is a very different animal from using them to disarm people whose only “red flag” was owning firearms at all. The difference between those two scenarios should be obvious to all, but if the latter starts it’s a whole new ball game, and I suspect the response will reflect that.
….at least one death that I know of….
Depends on what carrot and sticks are utilized.
That’s the point of having our own sticks.
Anyone who can’t accept that some are fated to be the first ones behind the door of the first wave of landing craft approaching Omaha Beach might as well turn in their guns now. Or better yet privately sell them to others to create more off-the-books arms those who are willing to risk the sacrifice.
British subjects have through the eons been trained to be..well, docile…our branch broke from that tree long ago…
At first glance that shirt logo looked like “BIGUN ARMS”.
I would totally shop there. 👍
No way to red flag laws. Red flag laws can easily be abused by someone who doesn’t like you, robbing you of your guns with a difficult process to get them back. As a compromise, a national license to carry (LTC) could be implemented on top of existing state LTC, if red flag laws are implemented, and people with a national or state license to carry should be excluded from red flag laws, AND if for any reason red flag laws are used on someone with a license to carry that is person is to be paid $1 million dollars immediately by the government. People with a license to carry have always been the cream of the crop of law abiding citizens (at least in Texas) and therefore should not be subject to red flag laws.
A national LTC would not do away with existing state laws and state LTCs. It would add an additional option with a uniform law as to the type of gun, holster, ammo, etc; places where guns can be carried (stores, restaurants, churches, etc); and when deadly force can be used.
For example, currently in Texas a person can carry under the authority of their LTC (if he/she has one) or under constitutional carry. A national LTC would leave Texans a third option; obviously Texans would carry under the state LTC because presumably that would give us the greatest ability to exercise 2nd amendment rights. In California or New York a national LTC would probably be the best option.
a license to exercise a constitutional right?….do people need a license to post here?…just something fundamentally wrong with the whole concept……
I can only assume people who support this either a) don’t realize all these killers passed background checks, b)think “expanded” is a synonym for “super-cereal-ultra-check” or c) are just banner Karens that would support literally anything whatsoever that may “stick-it” to gun owners.
Shire-man,
You left out “d) all of the above.” Other than that, well said.
Segregation today!
Segregation tomorrow!
Segregation forever!
Segregate your firearms not by “race” (color) but by those bought retail and those bought through private sales, store the latter “off-site” in a community comprised of others like them.
good advice…spread ’em out…putting all your guns in one location, even a safe…makes it easy to kiss ’em goodbye…learn to be more secretive…think like the French resistance during the German occupation…
Call me crazy, but I’m all for providing a stool sample on the spot… For that extra verification. Let’s just make sure they require it in a federal building… No mail ins. Again, for that extra verification. Can’t be too sure these days.
They already got the info from 4473s
Get 80% and 2nd hand before they change it
Your real question is where any of this goes in the Senate.
The answer to that probably lies in the outcomes of primaries, but maybe not.
The current crop of GOP elected officials doesn’t give a shit about their own voters, really. They care more about the Op-Ed page of the NYT. And there’s a reason for this. The hard-left shift of the Biden administration causes GOP some strategists to believe that they can throw traditional GOP voters under the bus and still win in a landslide because of defecting Democrats and the fact the the entire “center” has now basically abandoned the Democrats over inflation.
The calculation is that beating the $6 gas drum is more effective statistically than the 2A.
If that’s true or not will, IMHO, be determined this summer by a few factors.
The first is if the Left goes apeshit over Roe. Major Leftie riots and you can kiss any real enforcement goodbye and the GOP will have something to think about in terms of gun rights because it’s politically advantageous to look at the Left as violent aggressors.
The second, at root, is if gas prices rise too high and diesel goes with it. Past a certain point, cities will become ungovernable because the logistics to feed them will break down. That could bring about martial law in some areas. How that goes depends on if the problems are fixable in a reasonably short period of time. IRL, they’re probably not because Biden’s already burning through his only quick fix for that issue, the SPR.
Then there’s that whole Taiwan thing. People are finally waking up to the idea that we should have spent the last two years re-shoring computer chips. Late, but whatever. The real issue here is not microchips though, it’s precursor chems for medicines. We get into it with China and you can kiss what’s left of the medical system goodbye in about 45-60 days.
Three would lead to #2 even if #2 wouldn’t happen on it’s own. That happens and you’re talking anarchy in many parts of the country.
I’ve said for a couple of years here that the path *they* picked was really damned dangerous in many ways. Well, we might just find out how dangerous. Shit, I go into town today to pick up a few things for this car I’m rebuilding and 4/5 gas stations are out of 85 and 87 and low on diesel as well as 91. This would be the third or fourth time that’s happened in the past few weeks and I don’t see it getting better any time soon.
“Then there’s that whole Taiwan thing. People are finally waking up to the idea that we should have spent the last two years re-shoring computer chips.”
Working in our favor on that is the (mostly) unified world response to Putin’s little ‘adventure’, and how that cools China’s ardor over Taiwan. Russia now has many billions of dollars in modern aircraft that very soon will be unable to fly due to a lack of parts. There are no aftermarket suppliers of those parts like there are for cars.
I’m sure China is right now looking at what’s happening in Russia and are making re-calculations that invading Taiwan might just not be a wise thing to do right now.
On the precursors for medicines – Damn straight that’s a problem. Why we aren’t in negotiations with countries like India to set them up to provide them, I don’t know. They are very well-suited to step into those shoes, and they have reasons to stab China in the back over what they’re doing at India’s northern border…
still,..moving some of those key industries and people out of Taiwan might be a good idea…i’ve been a proponent of developing a base on eastern Taiwan, ostensibly for the purpose of evacuating foreign nationals in the event of hostilities…including our own, of which there are many…you can’t walk out of Taiwan as was done in Ukraine…if the chinese can build bases why can’t we?…something Japan is already doing albeit covertly….
If China looks at Russia they’ll definitely invade Taiwan.
Russia is making bank on selling oil, natural gas, wheat and iron to places like… India. They’re up $6.8 billion USD over what they’d have made with no sanctions and that’s just on oil.
Joe’s a fucking moron. He’s punching himself in the dick until he hurts Putin.
On the plus side, defending Taiwan would use a lot of Harpoons which we have in stock, which is far better than Javelins and Stingers which we’ve blown in Ukraine.
FOR ANYONE THAT DOESN’T BELIEVE OUR GUNS AREN’T ALREADT REGISTERED…I HAVE A BEACH FRONT CONDO IN NEBRASKA YOU CAN RENT..
Even the ATF admits that they can even trace so called ghost guns…not to mention the DNA left at most crime scenes on shell casings…Those everywhere cameras and satellites see you too…The gps and pings of your cell phones..IN THE END IF THEY WANT YOU THEY WILL FRAME YOU!..
WElCOME TO THE POLICE STATE FROM 1984 ORWELL WARNED YOU ABOUT
the ATF can’t even trace machine guns….best hang on to those registration papers, because if you don’t the presumption is you never had them in the first place…..
the moderators will not allow the real ” truth about guns” to be told 🤔🤢
Yeah these won’t work because they ignore the situations around both the rare but highly publicized “mass shooter” cases and the studies on how criminals actually acquire guns.
Sandy Hook – murdered mom to get guns, guns passed background check/age limits because mom bought them
Parkland/Texas church – passed checks because no info entered on perps to prevent purchase
Buffalo/uvalde – perps passed checks, (these are still so fresh they really shouldn’t be claiming causes/facts or solutions)
Vegas – guy was older and passed check
Columbine – straw purchase passed checks
Pre crime doesn’t work because any person could be law abiding until they aren’t, background checks only work if they have prior convictions or mental issues that were reported and disqualify them. Most crime with guns come from black market, stolen, straw purchase, borrowed guns.
Age limits are also dumb. If you think only 18 year olds get DUI or cause trouble with alcohol and 21 year olds don’t, or 40 year olds, pelosi’s husband? Once you “magic age” all gun sales to 21, that murderous 18 year old will just be a murderous 21 year old, three years doesn’t matter unless something is actually treating or putting that kid away, either they will steal/kill to get the weapons early or just wait until legal.
then why 21 for handguns?…i8 is a bit too young for that kind of firepower…I waited the extra 3 yrs…they can too…
—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
When Jefferson said in the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence . . .
that “[w]hen in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another,”
He was recognizing the right of revolution that, the Founders believed, had to be exercised whenever a tyrannical government threatened natural rights.
That’s what Jefferson meant when he said Americans had to assume “the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them.”
Let that sink in . . .
Comments are closed.