|
More info.. not looking good...
On 6/22/2013 8:08 AM, John H wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 05:33:50 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 17:25:49 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: You are talking about universal registration, not background checks. Otherwise there is no "paper trail". ---------------------------------- Nope. I am talking about universal background checks, "universal" meaning it is required in all states in a uniform way. Not talking about having to register all the guns you purchase. The background check simply verifies that you are not a felon, crazy or otherwise not permitted to own a gun. In MA, it's done at the time you apply for a permit and the reason it takes so long is because they actually *do* an FBI background check on you. Once it's done and the permit is issued, the only other "check" is done whenever you purchase a firearm. It's to verify that your permit is valid and in good standing, you are who you claim you are and there are no warrants etc., since getting the permit. Only takes a few minutes. The only way you can enforce a universal background check for private transfers is to have universal registration. That is what they are not telling you. ------------------------------------------------ What I was told is that the defeated background check legislation contained a provision for a 15 year prison sentence for anyone involved in creating a gun registry. But you know what? I am far from being considered a liberal or progressive in my overall political persuasion but I don't see any problem with a gun registry, even though it was never proposed. It's not a violation of anyone's constitutional rights to bear arms. The 2nd Amendment doesn't contain any such language. I think having guns registered to their owners is an excellent idea. And now I'll hear from all those tin hat wearers claiming the government is coming to take all the guns away. Won't happen unless the 2nd Amendment is repealed. What's the chances of that happening? Zero. How big a bureaucracy will we need to manage the registration process, the registration change process, the background check process. the records keeping process, the office cleaning process, and the all expense paid vacation (I mean 'team building') process? John H. Well, Barry did promise to *create* jobs out of thin air. |
More info.. not looking good...
|
More info.. not looking good...
"BAR" wrote in message . .. On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 17:25:49 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: ------------------------------------------------ What I was told is that the defeated background check legislation contained a provision for a 15 year prison sentence for anyone involved in creating a gun registry. But you know what? I am far from being considered a liberal or progressive in my overall political persuasion but I don't see any problem with a gun registry, even though it was never proposed. It's not a violation of anyone's constitutional rights to bear arms. The 2nd Amendment doesn't contain any such language. I think having guns registered to their owners is an excellent idea. And now I'll hear from all those tin hat wearers claiming the government is coming to take all the guns away. Won't happen unless the 2nd Amendment is repealed. What's the chances of that happening? Zero. Your problem is that you put too much faith and confidence in the US government and the several states' governments not to break the law. ------------------------------------------------------------- Maybe. But it's a lot better than running around with a tin hat on my head. |
More info.. not looking good...
On 6/22/13 11:17 AM, Eisboch wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message . .. On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 17:25:49 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: ------------------------------------------------ What I was told is that the defeated background check legislation contained a provision for a 15 year prison sentence for anyone involved in creating a gun registry. But you know what? I am far from being considered a liberal or progressive in my overall political persuasion but I don't see any problem with a gun registry, even though it was never proposed. It's not a violation of anyone's constitutional rights to bear arms. The 2nd Amendment doesn't contain any such language. I think having guns registered to their owners is an excellent idea. And now I'll hear from all those tin hat wearers claiming the government is coming to take all the guns away. Won't happen unless the 2nd Amendment is repealed. What's the chances of that happening? Zero. Your problem is that you put too much faith and confidence in the US government and the several states' governments not to break the law. ------------------------------------------------------------- Maybe. But it's a lot better than running around with a tin hat on my head. There's no rationality whatsoever among those who oppose background checks for *all* firearms transactions. |
More info.. not looking good...
"Hank©" wrote in message b.com... On 6/22/2013 7:58 AM, Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 6/22/13 1:45 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: Yeah, but they promise to properly fund the fence, and enforce the laws as soon as we let the 15 million new democrat voters register... Then of course they won't follow through, just like 1984 and 2006. These people hate America and are doing what ever they can to destroy the two party system... "These people" don't hate America. They simply don't buy into your concept of what America should be. And, specifically, if anyone is "destroying" the two party system we have here, it is the Republicans, who seem to be doing whatever they can to alienate as many voter groups as they can...women, students, Latinos, the elderly, the middle class, everyone, basically, who doesn't fall into the demographic and thought patterns of Southern white males. The demographics in this nation are changing rapidly. Even a bastion of Southern white conservatism, Texas, has a chance of becoming a "blue" state within the next decade. Adapt to the new realities...or die. --------------------------------- Harry, don't let this go to your head, but I agree with you 100 percent. It shouldn't come as a big surprise to anyone and it certainly isn't the result of the election of one President. The changing demographics of this nation that we are witnessing was forecast 20 - 30 years ago. I think the problem is that the "rules" we play by ... which include things like older cultural influences, tax codes and the general subscription to a smaller government role in our lives hasn't kept pace with the demographic changes. It's still a very fluid process. Some who were more influenced by how things were back in the 50's, 60's and 70's find it hard to accept and understand a larger government role that includes expanded entitlement programs and other benefits, mostly paid for by those who didn't rely on those programs. Meanwhile much of the population growth that has led to the demographic changes have not benefited yet from the expanded government programs in terms of becoming self sufficient. So it seems to many that a shrinking class is being expected to contribute more in terms of taxes and adjustments to their lives and expectations. That's understandable to a degree. In my limited exposure to people's attitudes today I've seen a big change in the expectations of the younger generation. They are far more comfortable with having the government play a larger role in their lives than many of us old farts did when we were their age. Many expect things that I would have never even considered or thought of. Those who still adhere to the "old ways" are usually in their late 50's or older. You're right though. Change is inevitable and corresponding changes to how our entire system run and financed is needed. Priorities have to change. It will become easier as us "old farts" die off and ride off into the sunset. We will have our memories of better times. ;-) ------------------------------------------ We won't have any memories. We'll all be six feet under, or spread out as ashes somewhere. |
More info.. not looking good...
"John H" wrote in message ... I think you are convincing me that the universal background check idea presented by the Democrats is more and more an invasion of privacy, and a means to grow the government (and liberal voting base). John H. -------------------------------------- I don't need to convince you. You were already convinced. |
More info.. not looking good...
"Hank©" wrote in message b.com... On 6/21/2013 11:31 PM, BAR wrote: In article , says... "BAR" wrote in message . .. In article , says... If a clean bill were introduced without a list of amendments by some members of Congress with personal agendas, it is likely that the NRA's opposition and lobbying strength could be overcome. The problem with universail background checkds for everyone is that it turns into a gun registration program. With the government's appitite for any and all informaiton it can get its hands on you should be wary of giving them more data. ------------------------------------------------- That's the standard, Wayne LaPierre led NRA answer to the question of background checks. The proposed bill that was defeated in Congress specifically outlawed the creation of any gun registration program with a 15 year prison sentence for anyone who tried to create one. But nobody talked much about that. With president, I decide what is constitutional and what is not constitutional, he will just chose to ignore that law just like all of the other laws that he has chosen not to enforce. We are getting to the point where the law doesn't matter. The government will just say that they are the legal authority and they decide what the law is. Sooner or later the emperor's reign will be over and we will return to to SNAFU status when all the changes are unchanged. --------------------------- Nope. Ain't gonna happen. We've been on this course for a lot longer than the current emperor's reign. |
More info.. not looking good...
On 6/22/13 11:55 AM, Eisboch wrote:
"Hank©" wrote in message b.com... On 6/22/2013 7:58 AM, Eisboch wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote in message ... On 6/22/13 1:45 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote: Yeah, but they promise to properly fund the fence, and enforce the laws as soon as we let the 15 million new democrat voters register... Then of course they won't follow through, just like 1984 and 2006. These people hate America and are doing what ever they can to destroy the two party system... "These people" don't hate America. They simply don't buy into your concept of what America should be. And, specifically, if anyone is "destroying" the two party system we have here, it is the Republicans, who seem to be doing whatever they can to alienate as many voter groups as they can...women, students, Latinos, the elderly, the middle class, everyone, basically, who doesn't fall into the demographic and thought patterns of Southern white males. The demographics in this nation are changing rapidly. Even a bastion of Southern white conservatism, Texas, has a chance of becoming a "blue" state within the next decade. Adapt to the new realities...or die. --------------------------------- Harry, don't let this go to your head, but I agree with you 100 percent. It shouldn't come as a big surprise to anyone and it certainly isn't the result of the election of one President. The changing demographics of this nation that we are witnessing was forecast 20 - 30 years ago. I think the problem is that the "rules" we play by ... which include things like older cultural influences, tax codes and the general subscription to a smaller government role in our lives hasn't kept pace with the demographic changes. It's still a very fluid process. Some who were more influenced by how things were back in the 50's, 60's and 70's find it hard to accept and understand a larger government role that includes expanded entitlement programs and other benefits, mostly paid for by those who didn't rely on those programs. Meanwhile much of the population growth that has led to the demographic changes have not benefited yet from the expanded government programs in terms of becoming self sufficient. So it seems to many that a shrinking class is being expected to contribute more in terms of taxes and adjustments to their lives and expectations. That's understandable to a degree. In my limited exposure to people's attitudes today I've seen a big change in the expectations of the younger generation. They are far more comfortable with having the government play a larger role in their lives than many of us old farts did when we were their age. Many expect things that I would have never even considered or thought of. Those who still adhere to the "old ways" are usually in their late 50's or older. You're right though. Change is inevitable and corresponding changes to how our entire system run and financed is needed. Priorities have to change. It will become easier as us "old farts" die off and ride off into the sunset. We will have our memories of better times. ;-) ------------------------------------------ We won't have any memories. We'll all be six feet under, or spread out as ashes somewhere. I'm hoping my ashes will be airdropped on the naked California gals who sunbathe near Paradise Beach near Santa Monica. |
More info.. not looking good...
"BAR" wrote in message . .. On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 14:27:36 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote: I really don't understand what all the fuss is about. In most states you must have a background check to obtain a permit. What's the big deal about verifying that the permit is valid for both seller and buyer in a private transfer? Again, it only takes a few minutes. It's *verifying* the permit, not doing a new background check each time. The fuss is that exercising most of your civil rights doesn't require prior government approval. Why should selling a firearm require government approval? -------------------------------------------------------- The government doesn't give approval. The government would only flag and disapprove, based on a valid reason. Nobody's rights are violated, including those of felons. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:56 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com