By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Universal Background Checks

snyps said:

Think about the old west (if you are not American use google).  There were very few laws.  Ppl got by in life by being strong and smart.  Point being if everyone is a well armed well trained person, you can then remove laws and everyone will leave each other alone because they don't wanna die.  Your argument is theory.  Mine is fact proven by American history.  Bad stuff will always happen but fear and loss of liberty is unnessassry.

What? How is your argument fact? The old west? Seriously?? That's when all the most dangerous people existed. You know what stopped it? The US Federal Government!

I re-read this again and I'm still shocked.



Around the Network
thranx said:
Tigerlure said:
Woah, when did Kasz become a mod? I've been away too long.

on topic: I guess the main reason people are against it from what I'm reading is that it won't change anything, and it won't stop criminals. Therefore, we should not try to put more backgrounds checks, because doing so would be uh... burdensome on current owners?

Just making sure I have the argument against universal background checks correct.


I think its slightly more than that. the cost of the background checks was excessive (more than the cost of the guns). they also didn't gurantee that the  information would be destroyed and not used to make a gun regristy list, or for other reasons besides guns (i believe even the ACLU mentioned this). I think most people support universal background checks, as long as they are done in an affordable way, and as long as they dont make a gun regristry list, or use the background checks for other reasons.


I think the bill explicitly said it could not create a gun registry list... I don't know if that means anything to opponents, but it was in the law



Tigerlure said:


I think the bill explicitly said it could not create a gun registry list... I don't know if that means anything to opponents, but it was in the law


I can find the bill any where online right now. do you happen to have a link to it, or its name so i can find it in google, having trouble finding that too



theprof00 said:
snyps said:

Think about the old west (if you are not American use google).  There were very few laws.  Ppl got by in life by being strong and smart.  Point being if everyone is a well armed well trained person, you can then remove laws and everyone will leave each other alone because they don't wanna die.  Your argument is theory.  Mine is fact proven by American history.  Bad stuff will always happen but fear and loss of liberty is unnessassry.

What? How is your argument fact? The old west? Seriously?? That's when all the most dangerous people existed. You know what stopped it? The US Federal Government!

I re-read this again and I'm still shocked.

We disagree.  No big deal right.  You really think all the most dangerous people don't exist in america today?  Ppl are still being robbed and shot in the face and there's nothing you can do about it but but a gun in the victims hand to scare the criminal. Criminals aren't afraid of laws they're afraid of bullets.  Just my opinion, laws are only effective against good people who you have nothing to fear. Shocking isn't it.. Jabb jabb j/k



Tighter gun control is not the answer, easier access to guns giving people more freedom to carry guns for self defense is the real solution to gun violence in America. Governments should not attempt to take away Americans universal right to bear arms. 



Around the Network

hahaha, from my european perspective this "we should go back to the 19th century" mentality looks just so absurd I can't stop laughing



Tigerlure said:
thranx said:
Tigerlure said:
Woah, when did Kasz become a mod? I've been away too long.

on topic: I guess the main reason people are against it from what I'm reading is that it won't change anything, and it won't stop criminals. Therefore, we should not try to put more backgrounds checks, because doing so would be uh... burdensome on current owners?

Just making sure I have the argument against universal background checks correct.


I think its slightly more than that. the cost of the background checks was excessive (more than the cost of the guns). they also didn't gurantee that the  information would be destroyed and not used to make a gun regristy list, or for other reasons besides guns (i believe even the ACLU mentioned this). I think most people support universal background checks, as long as they are done in an affordable way, and as long as they dont make a gun regristry list, or use the background checks for other reasons.


I think the bill explicitly said it could not create a gun registry list... I don't know if that means anything to opponents, but it was in the law

That's like signing a law saying you will never use Nuclear Weapons ever again... yet refusing to get rid of Nuclear Weapons.



snyps said:
theprof00 said:
snyps said:

Think about the old west (if you are not American use google).  There were very few laws.  Ppl got by in life by being strong and smart.  Point being if everyone is a well armed well trained person, you can then remove laws and everyone will leave each other alone because they don't wanna die.  Your argument is theory.  Mine is fact proven by American history.  Bad stuff will always happen but fear and loss of liberty is unnessassry.

What? How is your argument fact? The old west? Seriously?? That's when all the most dangerous people existed. You know what stopped it? The US Federal Government!

I re-read this again and I'm still shocked.

We disagree.  No big deal right.  You really think all the most dangerous people don't exist in america today?  Ppl are still being robbed and shot in the face and there's nothing you can do about it but but a gun in the victims hand to scare the criminal. Criminals aren't afraid of laws they're afraid of bullets.  Just my opinion, laws are only effective against good people who you have nothing to fear. Shocking isn't it.. Jabb jabb j/k

See, I understand your point, but the Old West is just a very bad example.
And frankly, I've NEVER heard of a gun carrying citizen stopping a crime. The only times I hear about such things are people shooting intruders in their home. But that doesn't prevent people from breaking and entering either.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but people with guns don't really stop criminals with guns either. Sure we can look at states with and without guns and look at crime rates, but there's all kinds of exceptions in that data.

As far as who is more dangerous, just look up the old outlaws. Nobody could stop them, even with huge bounties on their heads and bounty hunters trailing them. They'd literally stroll into towns, grab a drink, and nobody would do anything.



theprof00 said:
snyps said:
theprof00 said:
snyps said:

Think about the old west (if you are not American use google).  There were very few laws.  Ppl got by in life by being strong and smart.  Point being if everyone is a well armed well trained person, you can then remove laws and everyone will leave each other alone because they don't wanna die.  Your argument is theory.  Mine is fact proven by American history.  Bad stuff will always happen but fear and loss of liberty is unnessassry.

What? How is your argument fact? The old west? Seriously?? That's when all the most dangerous people existed. You know what stopped it? The US Federal Government!

I re-read this again and I'm still shocked.

We disagree.  No big deal right.  You really think all the most dangerous people don't exist in america today?  Ppl are still being robbed and shot in the face and there's nothing you can do about it but but a gun in the victims hand to scare the criminal. Criminals aren't afraid of laws they're afraid of bullets.  Just my opinion, laws are only effective against good people who you have nothing to fear. Shocking isn't it.. Jabb jabb j/k

See, I understand your point, but the Old West is just a very bad example.
And frankly, I've NEVER heard of a gun carrying citizen stopping a crime. The only times I hear about such things are people shooting intruders in their home. But that doesn't prevent people from breaking and entering either.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but people with guns don't really stop criminals with guns either. Sure we can look at states with and without guns and look at crime rates, but there's all kinds of exceptions in that data.

As far as who is more dangerous, just look up the old outlaws. Nobody could stop them, even with huge bounties on their heads and bounty hunters trailing them. They'd literally stroll into towns, grab a drink, and nobody would do anything.

Penty of people stop other criminals with guns with theior own weapons. they just dont make big media stories because they dont push the anti gun agenda. but there are many more than this as this is just one link i clicked on in google, and I often see these articles pop up on drudge.
http://nakedlaw.avvo.com/crime/8-horrible-crimes-stopped-by-legal-gun-owners.html

 

1. Marine opens fire in apartment parking lot

An Oklahoma City marine who was on leave suddenly began opening fire in the parking lot of his apartment complex late last year. Witnesses said he originally tried to go into the apartment complex’s main office, but after employees locked him out, he started to fire his gun in the parking lot. As he was firing, another citizen with a concealed handgun came around the corner and ordered him to drop his weapon. It worked and no one was hurt.

2. Restaurant owner shoots, kills armed robbers

Just a few short days ago, 2 suspects walked into a restaurant to order food. When the employee opened the register, one of the men pulled a handgun and threatened the employees. The suspect then reached over the counter and grabbed the money. He then turned and pointed the gun toward the owner of the restaurant who was sitting at a table in the middle of the restaurant. The owner pulled out his own gun, shot the criminal in the chest, and killed him.

3. Man killed in attempted robbery

In November 2009, career criminal Kevin Duane Dudley walked into an Alabama business with a sawed-off shotgun to commit armed robbery. Thankfully, some shoppers were able to distract Dudley long off for the owner of the store to retrieve his gun and defend himself. The owner ended up shooting and killing the criminal. Dudley had been tied to several other robberies in the area as well as a recent murder.

4. Two armed robbers get shot during home invasion

When two masked men with guns broke into his home and pointed their weapons at one of the residents, Cody Buckler immediately took action. He retrieved his gun from upstairs and began shooting at the criminals. The crooks fled the scene, leaving a trail of blood behind them. The criminals were eventually apprehended.

5. Mass shooting stopped by armed volunteer security guard

In December 2007, Matthew Murray pledged he wanted to kill as many Christians as he could. The 24-year-old went to New Life Church in Colorado Springs and opened fire, killing 4 people in the process. Thankfully, an armed security guard was able to get his her weapon and shoot Murray several times, stopping him from killing any others. However, in the end, it was Murray’s own self-inflicted gunshot that ended up killing him.

6. School shooter stopped by armed college students

In 2002, a shooting at Appalachian School of Law left 3 people dead. However, the shooter was stopped before he could kill any more people. Thankfully, 2 students were able to run to their cars, get their guns, and use their weapons to halt the rampage.

7. Grandma stops intruder

When 69-year-old Ethel Jones heard her doors rattling at 3 a.m., she grabbed her gun from underneath the pillow next to her. She ended up finding an intruder inside her bedroom, forcing her to shoot the teen in the abdomen. The teenager survived and faced charges of second-degree burglary.

8. Pizza Hut delivery driver says his gun saved his life

An unnamed Pizza Hut delivery driver started carrying a legal concealed handgun to work after being robbed twice in the last 2 years. Just last week, he was robbed by 2 armed men inside the restaurant. The men pistol whipped him and as they started to lift the driver’s shirt exposing his gun, the worker pulled out his weapon and opened fire. He said he had no other choice but to act and save his life.

 

 

Edit: Everyone should also watch this show http://www.aetv.com/panic-9-1-1/ I have only seen a few episodes, but hearing what these people go through when someone breaks into their house is really eye opening.



Tigerlure said:

 

Washington (CNN) -- In a major defeat for supporters of tougher gun laws, the U.S. Senate on Wednesday defeated a compromise plan to expand background checks on firearms sales as well as a proposal to ban some semi-automatic weapons modeled after military assault weapons.

The votes were on a series of amendments to a broad package of gun laws pushed by President Barack Obama and Democratic leaders in the aftermath of the Newtown school massacre in December.

However, fierce opposition by the powerful National Rifle Association led a backlash by conservative Republicans and some Democrats from pro-gun states that doomed some of the major proposals in the gun package.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/17/politics/senate-guns-vote/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Basically I'm just wondering. I guess I am not well informed of the issue since I'm not a gun owner, but could someone explain to me what was wrong with this bill and what's wrong with universal background checks in general?

To understand the backlash, it is important to understand the mindset behind things.  There is this view that we are in a crisis point, and any day, the govenrment can come in and take everything over.  In this view, the belief is if you register your guns, the government will know where they are and then be able to come for them, thus disarming the citizens.  People actually believe this, so any form of attempting to eliminate insane individuals from getting  guns and attacking people is seen as a threat to good citizens.  And in this, you have ANYTHING on the part of the government, being opposed.  These individuals only see more guns as the answer, and they even proposed more guns in schools, in order to stop individuals from coming in and doing shootings.  In short, have the janitors as commandos who will take down thungs with properly aimed shots to their head, and because these janitors are so competent shots, you dont have to worry about them missing and hitting innocent bystandards.  For these individuals, the government is seen as a greater threat than insane individuals getting ahold of guns, so they are willing to tolerate students being shot and killed in school in order to protect their freedom.  And yes, this wreckless mindset is fully justified and supported, because for some people, freedom above the loss of human life, is an essential part for them to live.