Universal Background Checks

[Englebert]

I've posted this topic before, and got zero responses from the anti-gun nuts. Let's try this again, since the anti-gun nut administration is in charge.

Biden has said that universal background checks should be mandatory for all gun purchases. What does he mean? What is the Liberal agenda for this? Registration? Confiscation? Let's begin.

What questions should be asked on a background check that prohibits guns from being in the hands of criminals but lets law abiding citizens exercise their 2nd amendment right? Please outline these inquiries that distinguishes who qualifies and who is prohibited?

Furthermore, and just importantly, who gets to add/delete/edit these questions on the background check? Do any edits/adds/deletes require a vote from a particular governing body? If someone (who knows who) decides that a speeding ticket should prohibit one from owning a gun, can that "czar" add this provision to the background checklist? Who oversees the questions asked on the form? Are these people elected?

What provisions do we have to stop abuse of the background check interrogation? What questions determine qualification, what questions determine disqualification? I'm not asking what is the current format, I'm asking what is the future format...and who has authority to alter it? And as a reminder, a certain Senator has already stated that United States veterans, who have been trained in gun safety, should be disqualified. Another Senator has stated that anyone going through a divorce should be disqualified. So I'm highly interested in hearing other brain-dead rationale for disqualifications, as well as rational disqualifications.

Furthermore, if someone is deemed to be too unstable as to have their constitutional right to own a firearm revoked, is that person also too unstable to vote? Should ethnicity/race continue to be one of the questions?

Please outline the questions that should be asked that determines your ability to exercise your right to own a firearm? As a bonus (LOL), please specify how often a person must submit to the background check? And how much should he have to pay for the privilege of this interrogation. (I'm not even going to mention Jim Crow...the liberal dog whistle)

[Englebert]

I was pretty confident no Liberal would respond to this. I'm also confident that any Liberal who reads this will realize the fallacy of their position, but will maintain their rabid support of background checks. The hypocrisy will be lost (or ignored).

I don't know how many sane people have given thought to background checks. My fear is that these checks are simply a gateway for gun registration, restriction, then ultimately confiscation.

Registration: I have no doubt the registration data (background check data) is currently being saved. No doubt. No proof other than past history...like Google claiming they don't save personal data. (Yes, they claimed this for years, and paid billions of dollars in fines...but still kept doing it.) Once established (practically there now), how much burden of time and cost will it become to continually register...I mean, consent to a background check. Will these checks become annual, monthly, weekly? How much will you have to pay for the privilege of registering your constitutionally protected right? Who gets to decide? Biden? AOC?

Restriction: Like in my initial post, who gets to decide what qualifies as revocation criteria? Who gets to modify these qualifications, and how easy will it become for additional restrictions? Will Biden get to add restrictions? Pelosi? Schumer? Joe Blow who is unelected but serves a vital role as hallway monitor in FBI headquarters?

Confiscation: You register (background check) your gun, you then get put on the restriction list...you then lose your ability to exercise your second amendment right. Not a hard path to navigate.

Anti-gun nuts are coming at all angles. From terrorizing gun and ammo manufactures through litigation liability, to financial terrorism by forcing banks not to associate in any form or fashion with gun and ammo manufactures, to slowly introducing limitations to the type and capabilities of guns, to publicly demonizing gun owners, to forcing registration and restrictions on gun owners. I hope we are paying attention...and act accordingly. If I wanted to get rid of guns in the United States, establishing, mandating, then abusing background checks would be my first route.

[Law Man]

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[baddog]

On 4/8/2021 at 11:01 PM, Englebert said:

I've posted this topic before, and got zero responses from the anti-gun nuts. Let's try this again, since the anti-gun nut administration is in charge.

Biden has said that universal background checks should be mandatory for all gun purchases. What does he mean? What is the Liberal agenda for this? Registration? Confiscation? Let's begin.

What questions should be asked on a background check that prohibits guns from being in the hands of criminals but lets law abiding citizens exercise their 2nd amendment right? Please outline these inquiries that distinguishes who qualifies and who is prohibited?

Furthermore, and just importantly, who gets to add/delete/edit these questions on the background check? Do any edits/adds/deletes require a vote from a particular governing body? If someone (who knows who) decides that a speeding ticket should prohibit one from owning a gun, can that "czar" add this provision to the background checklist? Who oversees the questions asked on the form? Are these people elected?

What provisions do we have to stop abuse of the background check interrogation? What questions determine qualification, what questions determine disqualification? I'm not asking what is the current format, I'm asking what is the future format...and who has authority to alter it? And as a reminder, a certain Senator has already stated that United States veterans, who have been trained in gun safety, should be disqualified. Another Senator has stated that anyone going through a divorce should be disqualified. So I'm highly interested in hearing other brain-dead rationale for disqualifications, as well as rational disqualifications.

Furthermore, if someone is deemed to be too unstable as to have their constitutional right to own a firearm revoked, is that person also too unstable to vote? Should ethnicity/race continue to be one of the questions?

Please outline the questions that should be asked that determines your ability to exercise your right to own a firearm? As a bonus (LOL), please specify how often a person must submit to the background check? And how much should he have to pay for the privilege of this interrogation. (I'm not even going to mention Jim Crow...the liberal dog whistle)

I worry most about Conceal Carry Licensed individuals being at the top of a list. I really can’t add to your post as you have covered the plan very well. 

[tvc184]

Background checks really don’t bother me in theory. In practice they scare the heck out of me. 

There is only one reason for universal background checks and that is the next step in gun control and eventual confiscation. I don’t think it bothers most people that people convicted of violent felonies cannot legally obtain a firearm. That is just a carrot in front of the horse however. 

Let’s go out on a limb and suggest that universal background checks passes into law but to do that the federal and state governments have to give up all future gun control legislation. That means no particular weapons ban and no high-capacity magazine ban. If you are not a felon, then you can buy, own, obtain  one….period.

That is it. I don’t think most people would object to that. The problem is that it would not end there, no matter what the promises. The moment such a law passed, even with promises to not seek any gun legislation in the future, the next step would be on the agenda. It would be, OK, since you don’t mind background checks, then you should not mind registering your weapons. and then the next step… And then the next step… 

All under, “common sense gun legislation”.

[Realville]

There is only one amendment which includes the words ‘shall not be infringed’ 

- The 2nd Amendment 

[SmashMouth]

I’ve posted many times that I’m a gun owner. I have lots and lots of them. I don’t have an issue with submitting to a basic background check, like I’ve always had to. I buy many guns from individuals where I’m not required to being submitted to screening. If I had to, I would. The fact that I can’t have a machine gun doesn’t hurt my feelings either. I want one, but I’ve never been able to legally obtain one, so I guess it never really bothered me. If they say I can’t buy anymore 100 round clips, then life will go on. As far as a waiting period, I think that’s a huge inconvenience. I’m not in favor of a 10 day wait. Not letting felons or insane folks own guns is probably a good thing. Nevertheless, none of those measures prohibit my 2nd Amendment rights. My only fear is that recent legislative steps is just the first step to making private gun ownership obsolete. 

[bullets13]

I don't really mind background checks.  For safety reasons, it's important to make sure people are who they say they are when guns are purchased.  Kinda the same way it's important to make sure people are who they say they are when they're voting.  

[Realville]

Last time I checked criminals were not voluntarily submitting to background checks to purchase guns. In theory it’s a good idea but the bad guys aren’t going to abide by the background check so it’s just more red tape for the good guys.