Require all firearm sales to go through a NICS check?

[Father of four]

Require all firearm sales to go through a NICS check? No.

How about we enforce the current laws on the books as they were originally enforced and stop giving the criminal more rights than the victim. If you decide to kill you get the same..... Most criminals dont fear the prison term they would get for stealing a firearm let alone using it to rob, kill or whatever. If the penalty fit the crime and they realized what was ahead of them it would deter a heck of alot of what currently goes on.

I believe a thief should lose a finger or hand, a rapist a differnet part of their anatomy, a killer their life. Yeah we have the death penalty but if the namby pamby in the mansion says no that over rides our vote. If they had a dire consequence rather than a couple months if that in a government hotel it sure would help to reduce overcrowding in prisons too.


Let the bleeding hearts loose to attack that.

Could not have said it better myself.

 

[fd15k]

LiveLeak.com - JELAOUS GUY KILLED HIS GIRLFRIEND

Yeah? Tell that to her.

That has absolutely no relevance.

 

[Father of four]

"As for the knives, automobiles and airplanes... I'm not sure why radical gun owners can't comprehend that those items are not designed for most effective ending of life, and have a utilitarian function in day to day life."

Yeah? I guess not...

 

[Father of four]

Knife - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Knives as weapons

As a weapon, the knife is universally adopted as an essential tool. It is the essential element of a knife fight. For example:

Ballistic knife: A specialized combat knife with a detachable gas- or spring-propelled blade that can be fired to a distance of several feet or meters by pressing a trigger or switch on the handle.
Bayonet: A knife-shaped close-quarters fighting weapon designed to attach to the muzzle of a rifle or similar weapon.
Combat knife: Any knife intended to be used by soldiers in the field, as a general-use tool, but also for fighting.
Dagger: A double-edged combat knife with a central spine and edges sharpened their full length, used primarily for stabbing. Variations include the Stiletto and Push dagger. See List of daggers for a more detailed list.
Fighting knife: A knife with a blade designed to inflict a lethal injury in a physical confrontation between two or more individuals at very short range (grappling distance). Well known examples include the Bowie knife and the Fairbairn-Sykes Fighting Knife.
Rampuri: An Indian gravity knife of formidable reputation having a single edged blade roughly 9 to 12 inches long.
Shiv: A crudely made homemade knife out of everyday materials, especially prevalent in prisons among inmates. An alternate name in some prisons is Shank.
Trench knife: Purpose-made or improvised knives, intended for close-quarter fighting, particularly in trench warfare characterized by a d-shaped integral hand guard

 

[fd15k]

Knife - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Knives as weapons

As a weapon, the knife is universally adopted as an essential tool. It is the essential element of a knife fight. For example:

Ballistic knife: A specialized combat knife with a detachable gas- or spring-propelled blade that can be fired to a distance of several feet or meters by pressing a trigger or switch on the handle.
Bayonet: A knife-shaped close-quarters fighting weapon designed to attach to the muzzle of a rifle or similar weapon.
Combat knife: Any knife intended to be used by soldiers in the field, as a general-use tool, but also for fighting.
Dagger: A double-edged combat knife with a central spine and edges sharpened their full length, used primarily for stabbing. Variations include the Stiletto and Push dagger. See List of daggers for a more detailed list.
Fighting knife: A knife with a blade designed to inflict a lethal injury in a physical confrontation between two or more individuals at very short range (grappling distance). Well known examples include the Bowie knife and the Fairbairn-Sykes Fighting Knife.
Rampuri: An Indian gravity knife of formidable reputation having a single edged blade roughly 9 to 12 inches long.
Shiv: A crudely made homemade knife out of everyday materials, especially prevalent in prisons among inmates. An alternate name in some prisons is Shank.
Trench knife: Purpose-made or improvised knives, intended for close-quarter fighting, particularly in trench warfare characterized by a d-shaped integral hand guard

Keyword adopted. But you're right, we should also ban martial arts.

 

[Father of four]

Keyword adopted. But you're right, we should also ban martial arts.

Cant we all just hold hands and go a skipping threw the fields of daisies? Cant we all just get along?

If you ban every weapon and tool available then why not tie our hands behind our backs...oops I forgot about head butts. Dang. However shall we coop with violence?

 

[Father of four]

Maybe muzzles are to be required next?

 

[RVTECH]

I think this would be a very effective way to curb the transfer of firearms into nefarious hands.

Sounds good on the surface but it seems I read somewhere, one time about the statistics of FTF sold guns being identified as having been used in a crime and the number was near zero. Throughout my 30+ years of being involved in shooting sports I cannot say if I have EVER heard of a gun crime taking place where the 'Gun was identified as being obtained by the criminal through a FTF transaction' It always seems the guns used in crime are identified as being obtained by some other means. I would think the media would be all over ANY reports of FTF guns winding up in the hands of criminals but it appears there is little to support it. I believe for the most part FTF guns sales have evolved as a venue for law abiding gun enthusiasts to buy, sell and trade as a part of their interest and is for the most part dominated by the law abiding, mainstream gun community. It would be easy to believe criminals would be intertwined within the FTF 'world' but it is simply not the case. There are probably many reasons for this and I can think of a few plausible ones myself. For whatever reason the FTF community has been self regulated and virtually problem free. Personally I know of many who have backed out of SELLING a gun because they trusted their instincts about a person at a FTF meeting - I did myself one time. Anyway if anyone has any solid statistics, or other evidence to support a respectable number of guns having been identified as being used in a crime as the result of a direct, first hand FTF sale I (and probably others) would like to see it. In reality I hear and read of more gun theft than anything else. It seems we all know people who have been the victims of gun theft and stories of theft are common on any gun related forum. Consider this - can a car be considered a dangerous weapon? Yes and there is no law against FTF vehicle sales. AND there is a highly illegal activity taking place daily with regard to vehicle sales and I'll bet many have never considered it but may have been part of it, albeit not illegal on the sellers' part. A person who has had their DL revoked for whatever reason but most likely because of a DUI(s). They find a cheap car with X amount of time left on the registration, pay cash for it and drive away, until stopped again or the registration expires. However within this time frame how many more crimes are committed by the new owner with DUI again a strong possibility?

 

[fd15k]

Cant we all just hold hands and go a skipping threw the fields of daisies? Cant we all just get along?

If you ban every weapon and tool available then why not tie our hands behind our backs...oops I forgot about head butts. Dang. However shall we coop with violence?

That's why I'm suggesting to legalize nukes. If everyone has a nuke, we will be very polite and get along

 

[fd15k]

Sounds good on the surface but it seems I read somewhere, one time about the statistics of FTF sold guns being identified as having been used in a crime and the number was near zero. Throughout my 30+ years of being involved in shooting sports I cannot say if I have EVER heard of a gun crime taking place where the 'Gun was identified as being obtained by the criminal through a FTF transaction' It always seems the guns used in crime are identified as being obtained by some other means. I would think the media would be all over ANY reports of FTF guns winding up in the hands of criminals but it appears there is little to support it. I believe for the most part FTF guns sales have evolved as a venue for law abiding gun enthusiasts to buy, sell and trade as a part of their interest and is for the most part dominated by the law abiding, mainstream gun community. It would be easy to believe criminals would be intertwined within the FTF 'world' but it is simply not the case. There are probably many reasons for this and I can think of a few plausible ones myself. For whatever reason the FTF community has been self regulated and virtually problem free. Personally I know of many who have backed out of SELLING a gun because they trusted their instincts about a person at a FTF meeting - I did myself one time. Anyway if anyone has any solid statistics, or other evidence to support a respectable number of guns having been identified as being used in a crime as the result of a direct, first hand FTF sale I (and probably others) would like to see it. In reality I hear and read of more gun theft than anything else. It seems we all know people who have been the victims of gun theft and stories of theft are common on any gun related forum. Consider this - can a car be considered a dangerous weapon? Yes and there is no law against FTF vehicle sales. AND there is a highly illegal activity taking place daily with regard to vehicle sales and I'll bet many have never considered it but may have been part of it, albeit not illegal on the sellers' part. A person who has had their DL revoked for whatever reason but most likely because of a DUI(s). They find a cheap car with X amount of time left on the registration, pay cash for it and drive away, until stopped again or the registration expires. However within this time frame how many more crimes are committed by the new owner with DUI again a strong possibility?

I have seen similar statistics, that FTF path of obtaining firearms is not the the top source of firearms in criminal hands. If I remember correctly, number one source was crooked FFL's. Then straw purchases. Anyway, the logic behind requiring private sales to go via FFL's is to reduce sources of guns in criminal hands, not to eliminate them. I know it seems like counter intuitive that this is brought up again after that mass shooting, where it would not matter anyway. But still the logic used is valid - if all gun sales go via FFL, then likely fewer guns will make it into criminal hands.

And once again, I don't support elimination of FTF transactions.

 

[saabin]

If a measurable amount of criminals are getting their hands on guns via ftf transactions then gun theft should skyrocket post a ftf ban. Criminals are not just going to stop committing crimes because we outlawed one step in their criminal process. A true criminal will simply commit more crimes to reach their desired end result.

 

[Nwcid]

We need criminal control not gun control. We should not even have to worry about "criminals" getting guns as those criminals should not even be out on the street.

 

[fd15k]

We need criminal control not gun control. We should not even have to worry about "criminals" getting guns as those criminals should not even be out on the street.

How about crazy people ? They aren't criminals. Many of them shouldn't be locked up. But many of them are also borderline crazy and may or may not present danger to society.

 

[chariot13]

How about crazy people ? They aren't criminals. Many of them shouldn't be locked up. But many of them are also borderline crazy and may or may not present danger to society.

If crazy people "aren't criminals", "shouldn't be locked up." "and may not present danger to society." Then crazy people deserve scrutiny when it benefits your own self interest, Or are you new to politics & just crazy?

 

[BSG 75]

You need to remember that background checks are only as good as the data used in their process.

Like I said earlier in this thread. I don't support background checks for all purchases because that would inconvenience me, not because they don't make sense logically.

All that background checks do is prevent (in theory) prohibited persons from buying from retailers who are required to perform background checks. Background checks do not prevent prohibited persons from getting guns. They just get them from friends, family, or "on the street". You could have the most fantastic, comprehensive, up-to-date database in the world, but mentally ill people who have simply avoided contact with the health care system and have not been diagnosed would still pass. Criminals and other prohibited people would simply avoid buying where background checks are performed. You could not enforce a law requiring background checks for all purchases without either compulsory registration of all firearms, or a police state. Background checks really don't make sense logically, except to pacify people who want "gun control".

 

[BSG 75]

As for the knives, automobiles and airplanes... I'm not sure why radical gun owners can't comprehend that those items are not designed for most effective ending of life, and have a utilitarian function in day to day life.
Otherwise, we should allow uncontrolled circulation of nukes - those haven't killed anybody in last 60 years, and there are thousands of them in the world.

Radical gun owner? So if we don't agree with your opinions we are radical gun owners?

designed for most effective ending of life

I usually have to explain this to non-gun owners and gun control nuts on Huffington Post, but it looks like I need to repeat it here for a "non-radical" gun owner. Guns are not "designed for most effective ending of life", or "designed to KILL" as it is usually stated. Guns are designed to shoot bullets, shot, or slugs. Period. I will agree that military firearms like machine guns are "designed to kill" as they were not designed for sporting purposes, but civilian firearms are not specifically "designed to kill". They are multipurpose instruments.

Knives are designed to cut things, and guns are designed to shoot bullets (or shot or slugs). Neither knives nor guns are "designed to kill", although both knives and guns ARE used for that purpose. But the majority of times guns are fired in the US, nothing is killed or even injured. They are being used for sport (target) shooting. And that includes so-called "assault weapons", handguns, etc.

uncontrolled circulation of nukes

Nuclear weapons, artillery, tanks, anti-aircraft missiles, etc. do not fall under the definition of arms protected by the Second Amendment according to the Supreme Court in the DC v Heller decision, so your point is moot.

 

[fd15k]

Radical gun owner? So if we don't agree with your opinions we are radical gun owners?

I wouldn't put it that way. More like "shall not be infringed, end of discussion" radical

I usually have to explain this to non-gun owners and gun control nuts on Huffington Post, but it looks like I need to repeat it here for a "non-radical" gun owner. Guns are not "designed for most effective ending of life", or "designed to KILL" as it is usually stated. Guns are designed to shoot bullets, shot, or slugs. Period. I will agree that military firearms like machine guns are "designed to kill" as they were not designed for sporting purposes, but civilian firearms are not specifically "designed to kill". They are multipurpose instruments.

Knives are designed to cut things, and guns are designed to shoot bullets (or shot or slugs). Neither knives nor guns are "designed to kill", although both knives and guns ARE used for that purpose. But the majority of times guns are fired in the US, nothing is killed or even injured. They are being used for sport (target) shooting. And that includes so-called "assault weapons", handguns, etc.

That's just silly. Let's do a simple test. Lookup "firearm" on wikipedia, first sentence :
A firearm is a weapon that launches one projectile or more at high velocity through the confined burning of a propellant.
Follow the link to "weapon", first paragraph :
A weapon, arm, or armament is a tool, device, or instrument used in order to inflict damage or harm to enemies or other living beings, structures, or systems. Weapons are used to increase the efficacy and efficiency of activities such as hunting, crime, law enforcement, and warfare.

See, they are even putting it gently as "inflict damage or harm".

Nuclear weapons, artillery, tanks, anti-aircraft missiles, etc. do not fall under the definition of arms protected by the Second Amendment according to the Supreme Court in the DC v Heller decision, so your point is moot.

See, you're changing the argument here. If you were to say that "yes, guns are tools for killing, but they're protected", it would be consistent. Otherwise you fail the logic

 

[slingshot1943]

The reason the left wants all the gun laws is to destroy the 2nd amendment. This is laying the ground work for destruction of our Constitution.
If just passing laws solved problems, our prison population would shrink from drug law enforcement rather than increase.

 

[deen_ad]

It may reduce, but never, ever stop it.
California is a prime example of it not working. California has some of the toughest gun laws in the United States and yet criminals still obtain weapons, ammunition, and drugs.

So does Canada, up there the criminals have broken into the long gun registry database and used it to plan where to break in and steal the guns. Also, a newspaper did a test by giving teenagers money and told them to buy a handgun. Within a few hours all had bought them.

 

[deen_ad]

I think a reasonable requirement for firearms possession might be storage in a proper, certified for the purpose by the State of Oregon, safe. But once you install a certified safe, in a reasonable way, then you're off the hook. If somebody then breaks into that certified safe, then you have no liability.

Then let the state provide it free of cost.