Amen! Not that I would be for a background check even if those problems were fixed, but right on non the less.
If you agree with the gov that you do not have the right to a gun because you smoke weed then no you would not be a hypocrite. Otherwise see lilros post he says it perfectly and I'm stoned.
Regardless of age, everyone I know(shitloads), that own more than 3 firearms ....ARE DEAD! ....go figure
Me too!!! Why didn't I ever think of it like that before? Makes me wonder where this guy lives and as to what degree is the degeneracy of the company that he keeps.
Imagine there is no government (essentially some asshole in your business), who has a problem with me purchasing private property and why? Knowing that there is government, and bearing arms is an essential right protected by the Bill of Rights, why should one be limited from purchasing private property? To me it seems as though one is assumed guilty until proven innocent. Seems to be commonplace throughout our "just us" system...
Like xmaspoo, I would leave bc to the discretion of the dealer. This should efficiently restrict the gun rights of violent criminals. Of course, there will always be criminals with guns, but this lenience should not breed them, just as legalizing drugs should not create a bevy of drug users. Because their death couldn't possibly have resulted from any factors besides owning guns?
main reason I approve of background cheaks is because while it does not stop the hardcore criminals, it may prevent a impulse shooting, ie angry spouses, or couples, things like that when someones immediate state of mind is altered by anger and goes out and does something they normally would never do, shrugs, not the best way to look at it ill admit, but ... not the worst either,
But see, how could a background check predict these crimes of passion? If this person is acting on an impulse, it could be out of character and there would be nothing on their record to suggest malicious intent.
Background checks are ineffective. If someone wants to obtain a gun, they can make a zip gun, steal one, or buy private. The cat is out of the bag when it comes to gun control.
Where there's a will there's a way, or something like that... [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FinRqCocwGE]The Gun Markets of Pakistan - YouTube[/ame]
and it did stop my abusive ex from buying one, he thankfully didn't or dosent know the underground market to get a gun . and has no desire to steal one, lol I truly believe that is he had been able to legally buy a gun me or my kids may be dead, and if the background cheak wasn't done they would not have seen the numerous restraining orders,
I find it ironic that you think you could hand a pound of [unmentionables] to 10,000 people, and expect to find at least a few dead people in the morning... ...and yet you simply expect that handing a firearm to 10,000 people that there won't be an equal amount of dead people in the morning for the exact same reason. Your statistic proves nothing, but the assumption that stupid people don't own guns is a strong one here. Stupid people own cars and liquor cabinets too. What should we ban next...
long term correct, but in moments of anger there are several times I know had he had a legal gun in the house, I would not be typing this,
If the seller wants to only sell to people who pass their background checks, then I don't see the problem. Obviously, I'm not in favor of the state even existing, let alone have them preside over something like background checks for firearms.
just a thought. anyone else notice how if someone has a different opinion than you in this thread, they are automatically an idiot?