Thread
:
More info.. not looking good...
View Single Post
#
216
posted to rec.boats
BAR[_2_]
external usenet poster
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,868
More info.. not looking good...
In article ,
says...
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 07:32:58 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
"John H" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 24 Jun 2013 05:08:28 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:
The requirements to simply "own" a firearm and the requirements to
own
and carry in public (concealed or open) are different.
A permit is required for concealed or open carry in most states.
It's
also why some (like MA) is a "may" and "shall" state as far as the
issuance of permits go. Neither violate anyone's right to own a
firearm. The only reason a permit will not be issued is if you have
a felony record and are legally not eligible to own one. *That* is
the purpose of a cursory background check. That's all. It's not to
"take away" your rights unless you deserve to have them taken.
Geeze. Why is this so hard for people to understand?
It is not hard for 'us people' to understand that you would like
background checks for *every*
transfer of a firearm, a la the Senate bill.
Many of 'us people' disagree. Some of us don't see the need for the
bureaucracy, the taxes, etc,
when the checks would not have prevented the atrocities that have
prompted all the demands for them.
Furthermore, I don't think it's anyone's damn business if I decide to
give my brother or grandson a
gun.
John (Gun Nut) H.
---------------------------------------------------
I'll try again and then drop the subject.
I don't advocate a background check for *every* transfer of a firearm
as you stated. Not necessary.
What I am advocating, much to the chagrin of some, is that a permit
be required to own a firearm, much like a license is required to drive
a car on public roads. The permit is *required* to be issued unless
an initial cursory background check reveals that you are a convicted
felon or person who is not legally permitted to own a firearm.
There's no violation of anyone's 2nd Amendment Rights. If you are not
legally prohibited, you will receive a permit.
Once acquired, the only "check" made is when you purchase a gun,
either through a dealer or private party, be it a sale or gift. The
check isn't a background check. The check is simply to ensure that
your permit is valid and you are who you say you are.
Very simple. Won't solve all the problems associated with criminals
acquiring guns, nor will it prevent a nut case from going on a rampage
and going on a killing spree. But it *will* help reducing the
number of guns in the hands of people who are prohibited from having
them without stepping on the toes of anyone's "Rights" under the
Constitution.
Personally, I'd also advocate that a safety course also be required to
obtain a permit but I realize that's asking too much for our
Constitutional experts to accept.
Here's a way to garner support for the 'permit' idea.
Pass a law stating that a voter identification card can be used as a permit to buy a gun. Then do
the background check to ensure the individual is qualified to vote.
I'd go along with that in a heartbeat, and I'll bet a lot of Republicans would do likewise. Hell, a
law like that should make everyone happy. Probably put the NRA out of business.
John (Gun Nut) H.
I would be on-board with that.
Reply With Quote
BAR[_2_]
View Public Profile
Find all posts by BAR[_2_]