Background Checks for Guns and Voting!


I read a post by another and it got me thinking. Understand I do agree with better background checks but we need to really level things here. The I do agree with but I go further. He post mentioned checks for ID and voting and the like, well:) I am ALL for stringent background checks and I want it upheld by the SCOTUS because it sets a precedent!

You see voting is a right and so are firearms! Therefore we should apply these checks to voters! If you cannot meet the standards for one then you can not meet the standards for the other.

I think we will find that we have totally different people running the government.


The ACLU needs to fight for the RIGHTS of ALL LAWABIDING gun owners for a change.


NO! I want this to go through because it will give ammo to those wanting voting reform.


That might be a gamble though. We could lose on the deal and get nothing in return.


330m guns, I think they will play fair.


The danger of course dancing around the background check debate is of course the push for ā€˜universal background checksā€™ not unlike a registry of everyone who should not be in possession of a firearm it requires by its nature a national registry of gun owners. California adopted ā€˜universal background checksā€™ and it didnā€™t take long before it lead the state to start knocking on doors of people it felt no longer deserved the right to have their firearms and confiscate their weapons. We have a real world example of exactly what happens and of course Gabgy Giffords saw it and for all of its intrusiveness said, as any anti gun advocate wouldā€¦ ā€œIt just doesnā€™t go far enough.ā€


And they have and do.

The ACLU of Texas has joined with the Texas State Rifle Association and the NRA to fight local prosecutors who are defying a law aimed at protecting law-abiding Texans from being arrested for having guns in their cars.


Thank you Monte, I stand corrected.


Actually this defense was less about the right to carry than it was an ambiguous definition in the law for the term ā€˜travelingā€™ that arbitrarily ensnared some people and not others. ACLU is not known for involving themselves in guns rights cases and if this case was about removing firearms from the car all together, their involvement would have been on the side of gun control

As a matter of fact, a quick check of all cases that the ACLU gets involved in that deals with a firearm, it is not the right to have the firearm that is at issue, they are all about process and property issuesā€¦ I.E. the government took something away that they shouldnā€™t haveā€¦ The government failed to return property after innocence was determinedā€¦ The government enforced, as in that case you cited, a law in an arbitrary fashionā€¦

ACLU does not do 2nd amendment rights straight upā€¦

ACLU uses their own interpretation of the second amendment not the law as it is adjudicatedā€¦


In keeping with the theme background checks. The anti gun claim of course is that ā€˜We donā€™t want to take away your gunsā€™. While that may be true for some, the ā€˜slippery slopeā€™ is again seen in Washington where what is increasingly being called ā€œextremist protection ordersā€ as a result of Initiative 1491 is seeing more and more people have their firearms confiscated by a specialist unit for accusations that anyone can make. The law of course has a process but it most certainly runs counter to innocent until proven guilty and as we have seen with civil asset forfeiture, you can go bankrupt trying to prove your innocenceā€¦ With the rule of man, one day, regardless of who you areā€¦ they will come for you.


Universal background checks for ALL firearm purchases in America.


Absolutely negates the purpose of the 2nd amendment and creates the very atmosphere you craveā€¦ universal confiscationā€¦ Then we like rest of the worlds civilian population could be at the beck and call of the one world government you craveā€¦ (at least for now)ā€¦progressives are notoriously wishy washyā€¦


Yeah, why would we want to stop the administrative mistakes and failure to act on reports of mentality unstable behavior when we can ban all weapons and create a BETTER Black Market and creating more jobs to help the economy.


Iā€™m not sure just what you meant. That because I was opposed to the reality of what ā€˜Universalā€™ background checks actually mean that I was opposed to keeping guns out of unstable hands or you felt that the alternative to ā€˜Universalā€™ background checks was to void the second amendment by laws of precedent.

Universal Background checks go so far as to require proof of ownership in transfers of firearms between relatives in estate settlements. If no original bill of sale can be provided, the state gets you great grand fathers double barrel damascus steel shotgun and you can never sell the cute little lever action .22 rifle you got for Christmas in 1970. It has been determined on several occasions that the only way to adequately enforce a ā€˜Universalā€™ background check is via a national registry and if you believe that the 2nd amendment has anything at all to do with the civilian population being able to defend itself against an over zealot government, you will not be seeking a system where the government knows who and where every firearm is in Americaā€¦


I was commenting on the ban ALL MILITARY.STYLE rifles. In cities with.strict gun control laws (Chicago) there is a thriving Black Market.for these weapons. With a complete.ban.on these weapons, we would create a Stronger Black Market economy for these "Independent Firearms Entrepreneurs."
Apparently the the Leftist Liberals are blind or oblivious to this.


Please cite the legislator that has proposed that. And indeed, we need a national data base for the mentally ill and mental health providers need to be compelled to contribute, and so many other things that need to be done having nothing to do with guns and gun control.


Progressives are patient and persistentā€¦ baby stepsā€¦

I like that one line itemā€¦

  • Making possession of hollow point bullets and similar ā€œassault bulletsā€ a felony.

up to now FMJ or ball ammuntion is the only acceptable round used by the armed forces and has been for the last 116 years but people will try to attach the word ā€˜ASSAULTā€™ to anything if they think it will change the debate. (just as a note, the military is ā€˜thinkingā€™ about adopting a hollow point round for its new XM-17) Now this is a dilemma when the military adopts a long standing civilian munitionā€¦


The small caliber high velocity assault rifle, such as the AR15 designed for the battle field, a weapon for the infantrymen, with high capacity magazines, that type of bullet, designed to tumble, follow bones, that can hit your hip and come out your chest thru your heart. A gun which you can fire off 150 rounds in ten minutes, less. For hunting, sport and self defense their are PLENTY of firearms that will do all that.


Lets dispense with the ā€˜huntingā€™ reasoningā€¦ while hunting is a function of a firearm, the 2nd amendment was about defense, not only personal but against enemies foreign and domesticā€¦ Side lining the 2nd amendment as being a right of personal entertainment diminishes the seriousness for which all of the bill of rights were included. Keeping in mind that some opposed adding the bill of rights because it diminished the multitude of natural rights not added to the document.


Tell me about the .223! Educate me please because I have been reloading for over 20 years and I love to hear people that think they know spew oral diarrhea.

But do cover the .222, 22 swift, 221 fireballā€¦ Never forget the Hornet!

I need you to explain the development of the ammunition and DO start with the HORNET.

Also educate us on the 22-250 sir, your expertise will be appreciated.

While you are at it, explain wildcatting to us so that we may learn from your vast knowledge.