The Guns thread

[TheCommissioner]

personally my concern was closing the gun show loophole, another thing that should be looked at is all 50 states having a uniform permit and ownership standard

 

[Marvolo]

The sad part is most of these changes will cost money which means that congress has to approve the money that would pay for the cost whoch means congress can block most of this stuff.

 

[DarkKnight]

personally my concern was closing the gun show loophole, another thing that should be looked at is all 50 states having a uniform permit and ownership standard

the "gun show" loophole is not an accurate term really. It should just be called the "private sale" loophole. I've attended several gun shows. Sells of firearms at gun shows also still go through a background check when a firearm is sold by a firearm dealer. The only firearm transactions that do not go through a background check are the "private sale" transactions that I mentioned in my earlier post which is a citizen selling to another citizen.
Again, I'm fine with this. This just means in the future if you want to sell a personal firearm to another individual, you will have to meet said individual at a FFL licensed Gun dealer and pay a $15 to $30 fee for the firearm to be "sold" to that individual if he passes the background check that the FFL dealer must and have always had to conduct.

 

[DarkKnight]

The sad part is most of these changes will cost money which means that congress has to approve the money that would pay for the cost whoch means congress can block most of this stuff.

Just curious here, but what will it cost?

 

[Unbreakable Lex]

I've never been to a gun show and tried to buy a gun and not be asked to fill out a background check (especially for anything not a shotgun or bolt action rifle). 100% for handguns.

As DarkKnight has stated multiple times, it's the sell by owner (unlicensed) that is the real loophole. I think that should stop, as well as the bartering system where you can just trade guns or simply give/gift them to a friend/relative.

 

[Destructus86]

I applaud Obama. This is a fantastic step towards reducing the insanely high amount of gun violence in our country. The one country in the 1st world that is leading in gun violence by MASSIVE numbers.

 

[DarkKnight]

I applaud Obama. This is a fantastic step towards reducing the insanely high amount of gun violence in our country. The one country in the 1st world that is leading in gun violence by MASSIVE numbers.

While I am a Christian Pro-gun individual, (I see in your signature you are a Christian Anti-gun individual) I can agree with you I do believe this is a good step forward. I will not argue with that and agree. The private sells allowing the sell of a firearm without a background check does indeed with no doubt allow firearms to end up in the wrong hands is a fact. It is not always the case (a lot of law abiding citizens sell and buy private party but most of these individuals will not have a problem doing a background check or are already CWP licensed which means your background is already secured) but is indeed a problem. However, This will still not keep firearms out of the bad guys hands. Bad guys do not and will not obey the law. This is also fact.

 

[Marvolo]

Just curious here, but what will it cost?

The mental health component, the 230 new employees, and the departments funding that is controlled by congress.

The mental health funding does not fall under the rubric of an executive action, as it would require an appropriation and, therefore, the support of Congress.

And that, in turn, spotlights the limits of the president's refined approach.

Put simply, Congress still has a say, either in rejecting requests for funding, or in proactively taking funds away from federal agencies if the executive actions go forward.

"I have formally notified Attorney General Lynch that I will aggressively protect our Second Amendment rights using Congress' power of the purse,” said Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas). "I notified the attorney general that if the Department of Justice attempted to create new restrictions on our constitutional rights that I would use every tool at my disposal to immediately restrict their access to federal funding.”

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/obama-gun-control_568b03bce4b014efe0db7356

And there is the legal battles. The thing about requiring anyone who sells a gun to have a license will be fought tooth and nail in the courts.

 

[DarkKnight]

The mental health component, the 230 new employees, and the departments funding that is controlled by congress.



And there is the legal battles. The thing about requiring anyone who sells a gun to have a license will be fought tooth and nail in the courts.

Thanks Marvolo, I was not 100% sure what you meant. If they do this right, the cost of running the background checks could help fund the new employees.

A private seller will not need a license to sell a gun, they will just be forced to visit a FFL dealer to make the transaction to sell the other individual. If that person does not pass the background check the firearm cannot be sold to that person (which is no different and follows the same laws and rules as if the FFL Dealer was trying to sell a firearm to that same person, you don't pass you don't get it). All would be done with a signature and a $15 to $30 fee (fees may very but those are the fees around my area). All other forms of gun sellers are already licensed firearms dealers or else they could not sell firearms (was already a current law). There are no other forms of gun sells other than FFL gun dealers which are licensed and private part gun sells. that's it. Other than illegal activity via black market, cartels, etc., but that's a whole other issue.

 

[Marvolo]

Thanks Marvolo, I was not 100% sure what you meant. If they do this right, the cost of running the background checks could help fund the new employees.

A private seller will not need a license to sell a gun, they will just be forced to visit a FFL dealer to make the transaction to sell the other individual. If that person does not pass the background check the firearm cannot be sold to that person (which is no different and follows the same laws and rules as if the FFL Dealer was trying to sell a firearm to that same person, you don't pass you don't get it). All would be done with a signature and a $15 to $30 fee (fees may very but those are the fees around my area). All other forms of gun sellers are already licensed firearms dealers or else they could not sell firearms (was already a current law). There are no other forms of gun sells other than FFL gun dealers which are licensed and private part gun sells. that's it. Other than illegal activity via black market, cartels, etc.

You and I both know that congress isnt going to see it that way or make it seem that simple. Hell, they'll probably even take the bit about sellers having to go to an FFL out to be some unconstitutional thing.

And the $500 million in federal funding for mental health will need approval. And congress can just take enough funding away from some of the departments to ensure they dont have the resources to implement the new stuff effectively.

Congress knows how to kill something deader than dead or at the very least make sure it cant be implememted well then they can turn around and say, "See the presidents actions did nothing to stop the problem. More regulations wont work! Only more guns will work!" Or some other BS.

I want to be optomistic about this, but its hard to be.

 

[TheCommissioner]

the NRA has dumped 30 million into politicians to make sure NOTHING gets done on gun control, hell the CDC cant even research gun violence, and theyve been stalling on the appointment for a new director for the ATF

 

[DarkKnight]

You and I both know that congress isnt going to see it that way or make it seem that simple. Hell, they'll probably even take the bit about sellers having to go to an FFL out to be some unconstitutional thing.

And the $500 million in federal funding for mental health will need approval. And congress can just take enough funding away from some of the departments to ensure they dont have the resources to implement the new stuff effectively.

Congress knows how to kill something deader than dead or at the very least make sure it cant be implememted well then they can turn around and say, "See the presidents actions did nothing to stop the problem. More regulations wont work! Only more guns will work!" Or some other BS.

I want to be optomistic about this, but its hard to be.

You have valid points. but I'm going off what is current law and what Obama addressed today to become law. They cannot and will not make citizens (former private party sellers) "licensed sellers". But they can and will enforce any sells done by private sellers to be done through a FFL licensed gun dealer so a background check has been conducted. Question is, as you said, how will Congress move forward with this. You are right about what you said about Congress. They are not going to let this be as easy as it can be. That I agree 100% about.

 

[DarkKnight]

the NRA has dumped 30 million into politicians to make sure NOTHING gets done on gun control, hell the CDC cant even research gun violence, and theyve been stalling on the appointment for a new director for the ATF

Everyone has their opinion on the NRA, good, bad, biased, unbiased. I guess it boils down to how you feel about firearms and your political stance. But the fact is a lot of the anti-gun movements and people throw a lot of money and a lot of "facts" or "false facts" however you want to look at it a the firearm debate being anti-gun as the NRA throws at it being pro-gun.

 

[TheCommissioner]

Everyone has their opinion on the NRA, good, bad, biased, unbiased. I guess it boils down to how you feel about firearms and your political stance. But the fact is a lot of the anti-gun movements and people throw a lot of money and a lot of "facts" or "false facts" however you want to look at it a the firearm debate being anti-gun as the NRA throws at it being pro-gun.

what I stated isn't an opinion

http://www.publicintegrity.org/2013...oney-and-power-still-holds-sway-over-congress

the NRA holds significant sway over many politicians, even to the point where they are paying them to not even comment when mass shootings happen

 

[DarkKnight]

what I stated isn't an opinion

http://www.publicintegrity.org/2013...oney-and-power-still-holds-sway-over-congress

the NRA holds significant sway over many politicians, even to the point where they are paying them to not even comment when mass shootings happen

I didn't say what you said was an opinion. I said everyone has an opinion ABOUT the NRA. But as I said, Money and sway over politicians exists both ways. Pro-Gun via NRA and other Pro-Gun advocates as well as Anti-Gun movements and advocates. Its not a one way thing here.

 

[Unbreakable Lex]

Everyone has their opinion on the NRA, good, bad, biased, unbiased. I guess it boils down to how you feel about firearms and your political stance. But the fact is a lot of the anti-gun movements and people throw a lot of money and a lot of "facts" or "false facts" however you want to look at it a the firearm debate being anti-gun as the NRA throws at it being pro-gun.

I used to support the NRA. Then Sandy Hook happened. Then the NRA blocked Congress from doing what over 85% of the country wanted. I stopped supporting the NRA and actively started praying for a lunatic with an AK to visit their headquarters.

 

[TheCommissioner]

I didn't say what you said was an opinion. I said everyone has an opinion ABOUT the NRA. But as I said, Money and sway over politicians exists both ways. Pro-Gun via NRA and other Pro-Gun advocates as well as Anti-Gun movements and advocates. Its not a one way thing here.

find me any anti gun organization that spent $30 million, hell that even has 30 million to spend on politicians to keep them quiet

and this is coming from someone who was an NRA member from 14 years old, Junior NRA than a proper membership up until I left the military in 2002

They trade on misery and death and I do support the 2nd amendment but I wont be a part of that

 

[DarkKnight]

find me any anti gun organization that spent $30 million, hell that even has 30 million to spend on politicians to keep them quiet

and this is coming from someone who was an NRA member from 14 years old, Junior NRA than a proper membership up until I left the military in 2002

They trade on misery and death and I do support the 2nd amendment but I wont be a part of that

I was not calling you out if that's how you took it. There is not one Anti-gun organization as big as the NRA funding that kind of money at one time like the NRA. However, there are different big money Anti-gun movements and private funding by millionaires and/or billionaires. Bill Gates is one of them. Don't believe me? look it up. I'm not saying I support the NRA. All I'm saying is that for someone to think the Anti-gun folks are not whispering in ears and funding and buying there way in like the NRA they are mistaken.

Here is the deal people. I'm not here trying to argue or make enemies. I'm not here to try to persuade or convince. I'm here in this thread for two main reasons:

1) I am very knowledgeable in this area. I have been for years and have to be for more than one reason. This also benefits me and keeps me up to date on gun laws.
This was the main reason I came into this thread a while back and have been present since. When I was reading through here, I read ALOT of false information being spread around. I seen a lot of misinformation whether it be intended or unintended (I don't know which), I seen some confusion in how things actually worked with gun sales and other information. I just wanted to be able to come in here and help separate fact from fiction.

2) I'm pro-gun, I'm a law abiding citizen that 100% supports the 2nd amendment as my right to keep and bear arms. But, I am also a reasonable gun owner, hunter, and hobbyist that is understanding that there needs to be background checks to help keep firearms out of the wrong peoples hands. Will background checks stop this completely? NO, nothing will ever stop this 100%. Will it help? Yes absolutely.

 

[Destructus86]

There is one fact...the NRA has continually stopped any progress made on decreasing gun violence in our country. They have made this country a place to be pitied and scoffed at by every other 1st world country who has already dealt with this issue.

 

[Matt]

NRA aside, I don't see how anyone could oppose Obama's executive orders. None of it is terribly unreasonable. It is the opposite. It is incredibly reasonable.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

I used to support the NRA. Then Sandy Hook happened. Then the NRA blocked Congress from doing what over 85% of the country wanted. I stopped supporting the NRA and actively started praying for a lunatic with an AK to visit their headquarters.

Do you really wish harm on those who you disagree with? That just sounds stupid on so many levels.

 

[king666]

NRA aside, I don't see how anyone could oppose Obama's executive orders. None of it is terribly unreasonable. It is the opposite. It is incredibly reasonable.

Agreed.

 

[king666]

I used to support the NRA. Then Sandy Hook happened. Then the NRA blocked Congress from doing what over 85% of the country wanted. I stopped supporting the NRA and actively started praying for a lunatic with an AK to visit their headquarters.

EDIT: Forgive me, that was impolite.

But seriously, don't say that kind of ****.

 

[DarkKnight]

NRA aside, I don't see how anyone could oppose Obama's executive orders. None of it is terribly unreasonable. It is the opposite. It is incredibly reasonable.

I agree with you 100%. And that is coming from a pro-gun individual that is not a fan of Obama.

 

[DarkKnight]

There is one fact...the NRA has continually stopped any progress made on decreasing gun violence in our country. They have made this country a place to be pitied and scoffed at by every other 1st world country who has already dealt with this issue.

By dealing with the issue do you mean completely banning guns? What would you like to see change?