• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

A workable compromise on "universal" firearm background checks.

Discussion in 'American Politics' started by Daniel Martinovich, Aug 10, 2019.

  1. Hank77

    Hank77 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,638
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    The gun dealer isn't liable either as long as he ran the background check. I'm not liable because I didn't sell the gun to someone without a background check being done. The only person/s responsible for using a legally bought weapon to commit a crime is the person/s who used it.
    Anyone can try to sue someone in a civil court but if they don't have sufficient grounds the case can be thrown out by the judge.
    You just keep trying to muddy the waters of the current universal background checks and I'm wondering why. Is it because you want others to agree that your way would be better?
    Well I won't agree because all people involved are better protected the way they are done at the present time. I don't believe in reinventing the wheel if the present design works well and just needs an added spoke or two to reinforce it.
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2019
  2. Hank77

    Hank77 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,638
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    No you're not going to side step from what I said, from what I was pointing out. My point dealt with gun registration, which I don't like, and the government knowing who has guns in order to confiscate them. They don't need gun registration in order to know where 99% of all legal guns are in this country. That is what I showed you in my post, now do you have a response to that point?
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  3. Erik Nelson

    Erik Nelson Well-Known Member Supporter

    +993
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    The “Gun Show” Loophole: Myth or Fact? Is it Real?
    Posted on April 14, 2018 Author Fact and Myth Comment(0)

    Myth 1: The gun show loophole allows anyone to simply buy a gun at any gun show.

    Myth 2: The gun show loophole doesn’t exist and is completely fabricated. There is no gun show loophole.

    Fact: In most states, private sellers (unlike federally-licensed dealers) aren’t required to conduct background checks. The transaction doesn’t have to be at a gun show and therefore, what’s being labeled as a loophole isn’t specific to gun shows. Nevertheless it’s indeed possible to legally purchase guns without a background check in most states. A more precise label would be “private seller loophole.



    The “Gun Show” Loophole: Myth or Fact? Is it Real?
     
  4. Erik Nelson

    Erik Nelson Well-Known Member Supporter

    +993
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    how would guns be confiscated, on what pretext? Is there anyway of safeguarding against unwarranted seizure?
     
  5. Hank77

    Hank77 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,638
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    Those are two questions that I can't answer but I do believe that both would require acts that are not in agreement with our constitution.
     
  6. Silverback

    Silverback Well-Known Member

    598
    +337
    United States
    Lutheran
    Married
    I think the gun confiscation argument is a bit over played, I do understand their concern though.

    I think if a Democrat is elected, there will be a host of gun regulations proposed. I think an assault weapons ban is likely, and what assault weapons people have will be grandfathered but will have to be registered as part of the legislation.

    Once that is done, and shootings continue, and the registered weapons will be confiscated.

    But the shootings will still continue, which will lead to a complete ban of all semi automatic weapons and a buy back program. This could have some effect on mass shootings, but typical murders, and suicides committed with firearms will remain largely unchanged.

    Handguns are the issue, as 90% of shooting deaths are caused by them, both murders, and suicides (accidental, and negligent deaths as well)

    If people were fairly compensated, and the penalties robust enough for non compliance, a buyback program could go a long way to helping the situation, but you will never get them all.

    The writing is on the wall, it's just a matter of time if a Democrat is elected to office. All semiautomatic weapons, handguns, and weapons that use a detachable magazine will get the axe.

    Our goal should be to get President Trump re-elected, and keep the majority in the Senate.

    But then, how far do you compromise? The goal of the left is to take every single firearm. Which will leave COPS, the military, and criminals armed. The Hells Angles, Crips, and Latin Kings will not turn on their firearms, nor will they register them.

    It took the COPS "three" Minutes to get the Walmart in El Paso, and look at the carnage, all that was left to do is wash the walls.

    There are one million home invasions annually, 60% of all sexual assaults happen during home invasions...what do you do? People who know the population is disarmed will just rape, and kill with impunity. But the politicians all have armed security, so they don't care.

    The Government does not care about you, the COPS don't care either, and neither will help you

    Good for thought
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  7. Desk trauma

    Desk trauma Atheist Capitalist Supporter

    +5,746
    Atheist
    Private
    US-Libertarian
    American Civilians with small arms, they can overthrow the most powerful military in history should the government turn tyrannical but they cannot fend off those same arms being confiscated by a tyrannical government...
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • List
  8. GOD Shines Forth!

    GOD Shines Forth! Active Member Supporter

    303
    +250
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Private
    And yet some are really, really slow to get it.
     
  9. Fantine

    Fantine Dona Quixote Supporter

    +6,590
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    I have heard another compromise. Only let private sellers sell to licensed dealers. That way they wouldn't be sold on.the open market without a background check.

    Any RESPONSIBLE gun owner would want to make sure lethal weapons were only sold to people who could pass background checks.
     
  10. Erik Nelson

    Erik Nelson Well-Known Member Supporter

    +993
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    so law abiding gun owners are the "fall guys" for criminals & gangs?

    others commit crimes (with other weapons), so cops go after non-criminals 1000s of miles away from the scene toting firearms unrelated to casings from the scene?

    you're telling me, there's no way to unmask that as utterly bogus [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]-poor law enforcement practice?

    you're words are claiming a lot -- if liberal voters were victimized so much as once per (say) circle of a dozen friends or so, then they would stop being liberal voters

    so you're telling me, there's all this crime, and it's virtually all "neatly missing" liberal voters across America ?

    or, you're saying they are victimized, and are flailing blindly (and ineffectively) to confiscate the firearms they fear ?

    ---

    gun owners could head off all this negative PR, by agreeing to comprehensive car-like "Gun Ed courses + classed licensing" (class A/B/C for handguns/hunting rifles/ARs)...

    (say) through the NRA, which many gun owners have already completed, as a Gov't recognized partner

    and accepting some sort of "downstream liability" for any of their weapons used in crimes -- 80% of guns in crimes were carried illegally, derived from "losses" or "thefts" or "undocumented transfers" from the original lawful buyer, and many of those "losses / thefts" go unreported until police come knocking after finding the gun at a crime scene...

    ---

    your fear of registration => confiscation

    is causing you to act in a "furtive" "secretive" non-forthcoming manner

    that terrifies liberal voters

    and makes them more prone to support your fears

    ---

    American gun owners would be more likely to keep their firearms if they could figure out how to break the vicious cycle

    "I'm certified (Gun Ed), licensed (class C for AR) & registered, responsible (guns in cabinet under lock & key) -- more than you with your car (drivers ed, classed license, registration, car locked in garage at night)" couldn't hurt public perceptions
     
  11. Erik Nelson

    Erik Nelson Well-Known Member Supporter

    +993
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    you could also add in some reasonable "downstream liability" to gun sellers / buyers whose weapons wind up being used in crimes

    Police are apparently deeply dismayed by how many guns are only reported "lost / stolen" when they knock on owners' doors after their gun has already been recovered from a crime scene

    "oh, yeah, I lost that a while back, so sorry"

    if your gun is used in a crime, after you
    • sell it w/o background check
    • buy it but "lose it" or have it "stolen" without reporting the same
    then you're still on the hook, if only in some civil (not criminal) sense ?

    You can only transfer legal liable ownership out of your name, after
    • sale w/ background check
    • duly reported loss (w/ fine or fee for police to attempt recovery, say) / theft to convenient Law Enforcement hotline / website
    ?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • List
  12. Daniel Martinovich

    Daniel Martinovich Friend Supporter

    +416
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    What percentage of gun owners are registered hunters? Maybe 10%
     
  13. Daniel Martinovich

    Daniel Martinovich Friend Supporter

    +416
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    You get a lot less for a used gun from a dealer than you do a private sale. And private sale is less than buying a used gun from a dealer. We are talking around a $100 difference. Either way. That is why that idea is bad.
     
  14. Daniel Martinovich

    Daniel Martinovich Friend Supporter

    +416
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    No, if there is no gun registration list. Then to confiscate guns it means they have to go door to door to every household in America and conduct a search. That means 50% of Americans who don't own guns and would like to see them confiscated would have their basic rights violated too. The Jack booted thugs would be treating them exactly the same way their political opponents who have guns are treated.

    If the government has a list. Then the 50% of the population that is for the mass confiscations are not affected by the jack booted thugs. The thugs are only raiding and abusing their political opponents whom they hate anyway. Rather simplistic but see the difference?
     
  15. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +9,238
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    Yes, I see the difference. But you supposedly want to own those guns to protect yourselves from the "jack-booted thugs" of a tyrannical government. Evidently you don't think it would work, so why do you want those guns again?
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  16. Daniel Martinovich

    Daniel Martinovich Friend Supporter

    +416
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    First off I never proposed changing the current system. I proposed something that would help but not eliminate the "gunshow loophole." IE something that would aid in getting background checks for private sales. So I am not trying to make a better way. Just a way to fill in the gaps. Yes a spoke in the wheel is a perfect description. Wonder how you missed that?

    I don't really think you have to worry about me trying to get people to agree with me. It seems pretty apparent that most of the commentators never read what I wrote in the first place. Or at least never read it with the idea of comprehending what I was proposing. They are just here to express their opinions about guns and the debate in general.

    As far as lawsuits. In case you have not noticed. Wealthy leftists and government officials using taxpayer money have taken to filing thousands of lawsuits against their political opponents that do not have a prayer of winning in the end. It is the process that is the punishment.
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2019
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  17. Daniel Martinovich

    Daniel Martinovich Friend Supporter

    +416
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    A civil war is not on my radar. Even if it was it would primarily be fought by units of the militarily on either side. It would not be fought by gun owners agaisnt the US military. Obviously the fight would spread down to the general population eventually.

    A population armed with hand guns is primarily for personal defense of yourself and those around you. Having an AR-15 type weapon is defense against civil unrest.
    When the mobs come to your front door. a handgun will just get you killed. Seen plenty of examples of that over the years in the USA with riots. A mob usually will not even think of rushing people carrying big scary looking weapons. The cost is way more than they are willing to pay.

    Just for you info by the way. Civil unrest and the unleashing of mobs have been a favorite tool of dictators to take over a nation for...well 6000 years now? If the USA ever had a civil war. The unleashing of mobs would be a major precursor to it. It certainly seems we came close to some mobs being unleashed after the last election did it not?
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  18. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +9,238
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    OK, I see. You guns are not supposed to protect you against regular armed forces, but against screaming mobs of Liberals, who presumably don't own guns themselves.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  19. Daniel Martinovich

    Daniel Martinovich Friend Supporter

    +416
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    Hmmm, ever seen any of those "screaming mobs of liberals" throw fire bombs at occupied buildings? Pull people out of their cars and beat them to death? How many planned Klan executions were stopped by armed Republicans in days gone past? Please. Your asking me to trust a hundred million people who have completely rejected the morality and the principles in the Bible? I don't think so.

    Granted, I'll agree that in general, most of the nations south of our border are not yet personally responsible enough to be armed. They have just been getting the Gospel preached to them in power for the last 50 years. Historically it takes about 100 years for that kind of cultural change to take place. But they are simply prey for the wicked and their government cannot protect them. Don't you think they would like to be legally armed and be able to protect themselves agsint the onslaught of murderous pycopaths that are dismembering them , cutting of their heads and worse? Brazil has only 8 guns per 100 people in the population verses the USA with 100 guns per 100 people. Yet their murder rate is with guns is 7 times higher than the USA.

    I have pastor friend of mine from El Salvador. His uncle owns a little store front grocery that sells a couple dozen items. The gangs are so bad that you will have 2 or 3 gangs come ever day demanding protection money. Since they were starving him and his family out. He got himself a revolver and chaste them all away. 2 weeks later the government comes and arrests him and locks him up for two years for possession of the revolver. Who called the police on him? It sure as heck was not his neighbors. It was the gangs themselves.
     
  20. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +9,238
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    And you think your idea of what the principles and morality of the Bible are is going to cure all that?
     
Loading...