Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

I would agree to any background check...

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Vaultman, Apr 9, 2013.

  1. Vaultman

    Vaultman Clackamas Co, Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    233
    I would agree to any background check to purchase any firearm. Shoot, even a knife. If it was a background check, period. This is not the fight I think we should be in.

    The good fight (imho) is any sort of a registry. Background check to purchase should be fine, but there should be NO mention of make, model or serial number in this "Background Check." But what the liberals are trying to do is get a registry and they are calling it a background check. We must fight this so-called background check, that is really a registry in disguise.
    I am a conservative and stay pretty strong to the right. But let the government know who is trying to purchase a gun, but they should not be allowed to know what the make and model are, and should not be allowed to know if the transaction went through. Would you be ok with getting a background check prior to deciding if you want to purchase? I think that way anyone could get a 'check' whether or not they buy. I know there are probably technicalities that may not work, but overall I think this is the thing that we should propose. Say I am looking at a rifle at the pawn shop, and I agree to the background check. It passes, and then I decide that I want a shotgun too. No further background check, just the one. That is how it should be.

    Again all this is just my opinion. But I think that is "Common Sense", as the President likes to put it. But as soon as there is a registry, that is too much.
     
  2. Redcap

    Redcap Lewis County, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,990
    Likes Received:
    2,731
    Ridiculous. You are as bad as the libs.
     
    duane black, rocky3, Nwcid and 27 others like this.
  3. chainsaw

    chainsaw East side of Or. Active Member

    Messages:
    495
    Likes Received:
    113
    Instead of any enhanced background check crap,the govt. should simply put in place a registry of people that have a prescription for psych-drugs.Would just be included in the normal gun check we have now.
     
  4. mosinguy1

    mosinguy1 out by the ocean Active Member

    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    218
    SAY WHAT somebody find his marbles fast!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  5. Kevinkris

    Kevinkris Aloha Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,216
    Likes Received:
    444
    the "universal background check" laws that are being introduced are including a limited registration that lasts up to 5 years unless the department decides it is necessary to keep those records. so basically it is registration hidden in the fine print. it is exactly what you should be fighting against.
     
    XManSV, PBinWA, rur862 and 5 others like this.
  6. OLDNEWBIE

    OLDNEWBIE State of Flux Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,827
    Likes Received:
    3,957
    Sure 90% of gun owners as they like to say might be O.K. with that. If there was an instant check that anybody could do online that would state you are legally able to buy a gun. No records, no model number or serial number put in a data base somewhere.
    But don't drink their Kool-Aide! That is not what they are able to do at this time nor is it what their end game is. I was a bit on the fence on this issue at first but after researching things understand they won't be happy just at background checks and I think from the tone of your post you know it too.
     
    rur862, jimwsea, rocky3 and 15 others like this.
  7. Kable

    Kable Lynnwood Active Member

    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    171
    Why should one have to prove they are not a felon in order to exercise a right? Also background checks without any kind of registry would be completely unenforceable and criminals will still buy and sell firearms without background checks so why should honest Joe citizen have to go through extra burden and cost when criminals won't. Additionally even if you require registration Haynes vs The United states says felons don't have to register their guns because it would be self incrimination so again this would just target law abiding citizens and eventually lead to confiscation
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2013
    jimwsea, rocky3, TheHumungus and 9 others like this.
  8. OLDNEWBIE

    OLDNEWBIE State of Flux Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,827
    Likes Received:
    3,957
    Felons/guns is another issue, thats already a law like it or not. I admit it would be nice to know that the person I'm selling a gun to is legal to own so it doesnt come back to haunt me later. Right now a drivers liscence and a copy of a billl of sale is all I've got. Either way any bill proposed up till now is a step towards registration so I'm hoping Vaultman will do the right thing at this the 11th hour and call and send Emails State and Fed opposing background checks.
     
  9. Blitzkrieg

    Blitzkrieg WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,674
    Likes Received:
    4,849
    Imagine having to undergo a background check before you could post on this forum

    There's NO difference
     
  10. Vaultman

    Vaultman Clackamas Co, Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    233
    I will address what I can.

    You do understand my tone. Tone is hard to type, but I think you get it. I seem to think some others may not.

    Why should I have to renew my drivers license when some people drive without one? I, honest Joe, have to go through that burden, when the drug dealers and illegals wont. The court case would be of interest to me. Is that a supreme court case, I am going to have to look it up. That would be an interesting read.

    I have. I do not support any of these so-called "background check" or common sense laws that are being pushed now. Especially in my home state of Oregon. The one that really gets me is concealed carry in a public building. When has this been a problem? This is BS.

    1. But it would make a felon or criminal out of the person that sold or transferred that firearm. Assuming the scenario I mentioned in original post, I am not a felon or criminal and I would not be transferring any firearm to someone without a background check, and risk my rights.

    2. You may be right here, being in Oregon, because a majority of those in office have a (D) after their name. I think you are spot on that liberals want guns to be like cars. I just do not always buy into the slippery slope mentality. A law could be passed, that allows background checks like I mentioned, without registry, make, model, or serial number. I do not think it is likely at this time, but it could be done.

    3. They would stop me from selling to someone (private party transfer) that is a criminal. Therefor stopping me from aiding and abetting.

    4. What if I just got out of the psyche ward? What if James Holmes got away from the police after the Colorado shooting and went to purchase more firearms the following day? I know "what if's" are bad, but I believe in some restrictions. A felon cannot own a firearm. I am a firm believer in both 1A and 2A.
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2013
  11. Kable

    Kable Lynnwood Active Member

    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    171
    You don't have a constitutional right to drive a car though. I understand what you're trying to say and obviously I think we would all prefer background checks like what you mentioned versus how they are now but honestly I think people who we fear shouldn't have guns should not be on the streets. Too many violent offenders are getting reduced sentences, plea bargains and getting let off early the focus should be on changing that instead of trying to put limits in inanimate objects. Also Haynes vs US is a supreme court case
     
  12. Kevatc

    Kevatc Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,747
    Likes Received:
    671
    Why isn't the NICS check that is done now good enough? It didn't work when it came to Holmes or Cho. It was irrelevant when it came to Kinkle or Lanza.

    In order to maintain the rights of the 99.9% and keep guns out of the reach of the 0.1% there has to be a paradigm shift in thinking about a process for fairly adjudicating folks who are mentally ill. It's far, far, far easier to write this than it is to put in place. It will be and should be a very expensive endeavor for the state to prove that a person should not be allowed to enjoy their 2A rights. That said, is there any amount of money that a Holmes or Cho is worth in terms of pursuing a band from the 2A rights?
     
  13. speeddemon94

    speeddemon94 The Rogue Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,100
    Likes Received:
    682
    Sorry, but I don't think I know anyone who would actually submit to a background check , even if it were law. I've said it before and I'll say it again...Unconstitutional laws are just that, and illegal. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

    I'm really getting sick of this crap.
     
  14. deen_ad

    deen_ad Vancouver, WA Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,089
    Likes Received:
    1,310
    Actually is has been proven not to work. Canada tried it with long guns, after years and millions of $$ it has not been used to solve ONE CRIME. The database was hacked into and used by criminals to find where they could steal guns. All of that has been proven.
     
  15. OLDNEWBIE

    OLDNEWBIE State of Flux Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,827
    Likes Received:
    3,957
    BIGFOOT IS REAL!
     
    1 person likes this.
  16. new2coos

    new2coos Coos County, Oregon Member

    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    11
    have we already lost the fight gentleman? legislation like the above only makes criminals out of people trying despratly to follow the laws already on the books. i know im from california. ive given up too much in my search for relative freedom from a tyranical state. how much are you willing to give up ( or give in for that matter) before its time to stand up and act?:huh:
     
  17. OLDNEWBIE

    OLDNEWBIE State of Flux Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,827
    Likes Received:
    3,957
    Doing what I can by calling , writing and informing the low info voters. Other than that what are you suggesting?
     
  18. waltermitty

    waltermitty seattle Active Member

    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    105
    how do folks feel about the Washington Arms Collectors requiring a background check as part of their membership requirements? did you find that disconcerting?
     
  19. new2coos

    new2coos Coos County, Oregon Member

    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    11
    OLDNEWBIE

    i did all that to...now im 800 miles from everything i know and watching it all happen again. draw your own line sir. the pen aint workin in OUR favor if you havent noticed.
     
  20. duane black

    duane black Washington Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    849
    Likes Received:
    411
    This.


    Sent from my Nexus 4