1) A recent poll showed that nine in 10 Americans, and even eight in 10
NRA members, support universal background checks. Other polls have
contained similar findings. Given that your organization spends huge
amounts of member dues lobbying against regulations such as this, how
can you credibly claim to represent your rank and file membership?
Doesn?t this prove that the NRA is little more than a lobbying arm for
the multi-billion-dollar gun industry?
2) Under current law, would-be buyers of guns are widely subjected to
background checks. Is it your view that these current checks are
unconstitutional? If so, then how? If not, then how exactly would
expanding the current background check system infringe on the rights of
the law abiding?
3) Your organization repeatedly claims that the push to expand
background checks would create a national federal gun registry, with the
aim of confiscating guns. But current law actually prohibits the
creation of such a list, and mandates that information collected in the
process of green-lighting legal transfers be destroyed. And the current
proposal to expand the system doesn?t change this. So isn?t your claim
simply a lie?
4) Many law enforcement groups support the proposed assault weapons ban,
the ban on high capacity magazines, and expanded background checks. Why
should we take the word of the NRA over that of our brave and hard
working law enforcement professionals when it comes to how best to
ensure the safety of police officers on the front lines and of the
American public?
5) You recently said: ?The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is
a good guy with a gun.? Are you willing to support any new laws of any
kind to prevent the ?bad guy? from getting a gun in the first place?

On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:27:00 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 09:00:31 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:


1) A recent poll showed that nine in 10 Americans, and even eight in 10
NRA members, support universal background checks. Other polls have
contained similar findings. Given that your organization spends huge
amounts of member dues lobbying against regulations such as this, how
can you credibly claim to represent your rank and file membership?
Doesn?t this prove that the NRA is little more than a lobbying arm for
the multi-billion-dollar gun industry?

The devil is in the details. If the seller had access to the
background check system and the buyer had access to the stolen gun
system I would agree too.
I am not sure I would what a law that said every transfer had to be
brokered by a dealer.

How about every gun sale has to be registered, just like a car.


2) Under current law, would-be buyers of guns are widely subjected to
background checks. Is it your view that these current checks are
unconstitutional? If so, then how? If not, then how exactly would
expanding the current background check system infringe on the rights of
the law abiding?

If you forced people to use a dealer it is getting into shaky
territory.

Who's talkin about a dealer?

3) Your organization repeatedly claims that the push to expand
background checks would create a national federal gun registry, with the
aim of confiscating guns. But current law actually prohibits the
creation of such a list, and mandates that information collected in the
process of green-lighting legal transfers be destroyed. And the current
proposal to expand the system doesn?t change this. So isn?t your claim
simply a lie?

We are not talking about current law now are we. The question is about
what a future law might bring.

We're talkin about both. The NRA watered down so many laws that some
are useless.. just as indicated.

4) Many law enforcement groups support the proposed assault weapons ban,
the ban on high capacity magazines, and expanded background checks. Why
should we take the word of the NRA over that of our brave and hard
working law enforcement professionals when it comes to how best to
ensure the safety of police officers on the front lines and of the
American public?

Many law enforcement people do not agree. Why should we take the word
of the ones CNN interviews over the rest?

How about you find some that support assault weapons in the community.
I bet that's a tough job.

5) You recently said: ?The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is
a good guy with a gun.? Are you willing to support any new laws of any
kind to prevent the ?bad guy? from getting a gun in the first place?

There are hundreds of local, state and federal laws against bad guys
getting guns. Most are simply not enforced.

Most are unenforceable because they've been watered down by the NRA.
There are about 300 laws not thousands, which is another bs statement
from the crazies.

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 20:06:31 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 12 Mar 2013 09:00:31 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:


1) A recent poll showed that nine in 10 Americans, and even eight in 10
NRA members, support universal background checks. Other polls have
contained similar findings. Given that your organization spends huge
amounts of member dues lobbying against regulations such as this, how
can you credibly claim to represent your rank and file membership?
Doesn?t this prove that the NRA is little more than a lobbying arm for
the multi-billion-dollar gun industry?

Nobody in their right mind thinks background checks will end violence.
No, your silly string of logic is just that, silly string.

They won't "end" violence, but they will make some progress toward
reducing violence.

2) Under current law, would-be buyers of guns are widely subjected to
background checks. Is it your view that these current checks are
unconstitutional? If so, then how? If not, then how exactly would
expanding the current background check system infringe on the rights of
the law abiding?

Background checks treated with equal disdain as FISA law should be a
self evident problem. What about this don't you get?

Huh? What does FISA have to do with reducing gun violence?

3) Your organization repeatedly claims that the push to expand
background checks would create a national federal gun registry, with the
aim of confiscating guns. But current law actually prohibits the
creation of such a list, and mandates that information collected in the
process of green-lighting legal transfers be destroyed. And the current
proposal to expand the system doesn?t change this. So isn?t your claim
simply a lie?

Since when has "current law" affected the behavior of the lawless?
Either from the "hood," or blue suited, or white collared. What about
this don't you get?

Seatbelt laws and the fines associated with them. Reduces the illegal
behavior of those not following the law initially by imposing fines.
Also, side benefit, saves lives. Yeah, what about thiss don't you get.
4) Many law enforcement groups support the proposed assault weapons
ban,
the ban on high capacity magazines, and expanded background checks. Why
should we take the word of the NRA over that of our brave and hard
working law enforcement professionals when it comes to how best to
ensure the safety of police officers on the front lines and of the
American public?

How many law enforcement groups support the law? Why the huge
disparity in opinion? What about this don't you get?

Most do. Most of the public does. There's little disparity. What about
this don't you get.


5) You recently said: ?The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is
a good guy with a gun.? Are you willing to support any new laws of any
kind to prevent the ?bad guy? from getting a gun in the first place?

Give me ONE, just ONE example of any law, EVER passed, with ANY
penalty, that *prevents* ANY form of behavior. Laws punish, they don't
change behavior. What about this don't you get?

Seat belts. Even ****ing criminals wear seatbelts dip****.