Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Legally selling a gun to someone doesn't qualify as an accessory.Accesory to whatever crime was committed with the weapon.Weren't you just proponnenting for UBCs?Oh, I don't believe anyone should be FORCED to run a background check.I see it like this:Now, if I could just convince you that better for the law abiding gun owners , like the two of us, to take EVERY precaution to make sure those sales are legal. Including universal background checks.That's more or less what I saked -- you admit you cannot prevent crime -- how can you prevent illegal sales?
if you want to make sure your sale is legal, you already have the capacity to run a check on the buyer.
If you do not care, then you won't, regardless of the law.
Thus, there's no reason to force people to do so, and there's no reason to open the door for universal registration.
It cannot.Some of this other stuff though, let's say I have a gun and you buy it and then you give it to someone who shouldn't have had it, how can that POSSIBLY be stopped by any new laws?
What crime would that be?I just think that if a gun is used in a crime and it is proven that you sold/gave the gun to the person who committed the crime without running a background check that you should be charged with a crime.
I am.Be reasonable and realistic.
Legally selling a gun to someone doesn't qualify as an accessory.Accesory to whatever crime was committed with the weapon.Weren't you just proponnenting for UBCs?Oh, I don't believe anyone should be FORCED to run a background check.I see it like this:Now, if I could just convince you that better for the law abiding gun owners , like the two of us, to take EVERY precaution to make sure those sales are legal. Including universal background checks.
if you want to make sure your sale is legal, you already have the capacity to run a check on the buyer.
If you do not care, then you won't, regardless of the law.
Thus, there's no reason to force people to do so, and there's no reason to open the door for universal registration.
It cannot.Some of this other stuff though, let's say I have a gun and you buy it and then you give it to someone who shouldn't have had it, how can that POSSIBLY be stopped by any new laws?
What crime would that be?I just think that if a gun is used in a crime and it is proven that you sold/gave the gun to the person who committed the crime without running a background check that you should be charged with a crime.
I am.Be reasonable and realistic.
-If you want to make sure your sale is legal, you already have the capacity to run a check on the buyer.
-If you do not care, then you won't, regardless of the law.
Thus, there's no reason to force people to do so, and there's no reason to open the door for universal registration.
The plain truth is that gun control laws make those writing and passing the laws feel that they’ve done something meaningful, never mind the fact that they don’t deter crime by firearm.
Fully agree.
For liberals, the gun control debate isn’t actually about guns. It’s about suppressing power. To be more specific, it’s about whether power should lie with the people or with the government. Liberals, of course, side with government.
Fully disagree.
Liberals don't do "gun control". Know that Second Amendment? We wrote it.
No, actual liberals wrote it...you guys...you took the term "liberal" and use it to hide the fact that you are leftwing, big government statists..the exact opposite of a true "liberal."
The plain truth is that gun control laws make those writing and passing the laws feel that they’ve done something meaningful, never mind the fact that they don’t deter crime by firearm.
Fully agree.
For liberals, the gun control debate isn’t actually about guns. It’s about suppressing power. To be more specific, it’s about whether power should lie with the people or with the government. Liberals, of course, side with government.
Fully disagree.
Liberals don't do "gun control". Know that Second Amendment? We wrote it.
No, liberals didn't write the 2nd Amendment, and it isn't even a liberal /conservative issue either.
It's a control issue. no different than those who wish to use the government to outlaw abortion, or gay marriage, or discrimination or what have you, It's all about some people want to use the power of government to force others to behave in a certain manner that is inconsistent with our founding principles. That being, if you aren't hurting someone else, the government will leave you alone.
They sell 1000 guns to a "dealer" who sells the guns to 20 guys who sell the guns to 1000 guys and who knows where those guns are. No biggy, they'll just make more. Who has all these guns? We don't know. It's insane. Put GPS on every gun. LOL Lojack.I assume she means illegal sales.Isn't the more important question "what unregulated flow are you talking about?"If we cannot prevent tee former crime, why do you think we can prevent the latter?Honest truth is nothing is going to prevent a but from shooting up a place. It's gonna happen occasionally.
But what we can do is stop the unregulated flow of guns onto our streets.
The person you sold it to wouldn't give it to someone who shouldn't have a gun. That's how you stop it. Hold them responsible.That's more or less what I saked -- you admit you cannot prevent crime -- how can you prevent illegal sales?then my question would be "how in the world would you POSSIBLY regulate illegal sales?"Certainly -- that why I assumed she meant illegal sales.As you of course know, we disagree on a few aspects of gun control, but her claim that there is an unregulated flow of guns onto the street is just ludicrous. There are TONS of regulations.I assume she means illegal sales.
Now, if I could just convince you that better for the law abiding gun owners , like the two of us, to take EVERY precaution to make sure those sales are legal. Including universal background checks.
Some of this other stuff though, let's say I have a gun and you buy it and then you give it to someone who shouldn't have had it, how can that POSSIBLY be stopped by any new laws?
You have no idea what you;re talking about.They sell 1000 guns to a "dealer" who sells the guns to 20 guys who sell the guns to 1000 guys and who knows where those guns are. No biggy, they'll just make more. Who has all these guns? We don't know. It's insane. Put GPS on every gun. LOL Lojack.I assume she means illegal sales.Isn't the more important question "what unregulated flow are you talking about?"If we cannot prevent tee former crime, why do you think we can prevent the latter?Honest truth is nothing is going to prevent a but from shooting up a place. It's gonna happen occasionally.
But what we can do is stop the unregulated flow of guns onto our streets.
Let me be more clear: If you do not care if you are selling to a criminal, you are unlikely to burden yourself with the requirement to run a background check, especially in that it is impossible to prove that you even owned the gun in the first place.You are , of course, wrong on that point.Legally selling a gun to someone doesn't qualify as an accessory.Accesory to whatever crime was committed with the weapon.Weren't you just proponnenting for UBCs?Oh, I don't believe anyone should be FORCED to run a background check.I see it like this:
if you want to make sure your sale is legal, you already have the capacity to run a check on the buyer.
If you do not care, then you won't, regardless of the law.
Thus, there's no reason to force people to do so, and there's no reason to open the door for universal registration.
It cannot.
What crime would that be?I just think that if a gun is used in a crime and it is proven that you sold/gave the gun to the person who committed the crime without running a background check that you should be charged with a crime.
I am.Be reasonable and realistic.
-If you want to make sure your sale is legal, you already have the capacity to run a check on the buyer.
-If you do not care, then you won't, regardless of the law.
Thus, there's no reason to force people to do so, and there's no reason to open the door for universal registration.
Let me be more clear: If you do not care if you are selling to a criminal, you are unlikely to burden yourself with the requirement to run a background check, especially in that it is impossible to prove that you even owned the gun in the first place.You are , of course, wrong on that point.Legally selling a gun to someone doesn't qualify as an accessory.Accesory to whatever crime was committed with the weapon.Weren't you just proponnenting for UBCs?Oh, I don't believe anyone should be FORCED to run a background check.
What crime would that be?I just think that if a gun is used in a crime and it is proven that you sold/gave the gun to the person who committed the crime without running a background check that you should be charged with a crime.
I am.Be reasonable and realistic.
-If you want to make sure your sale is legal, you already have the capacity to run a check on the buyer.
-If you do not care, then you won't, regardless of the law.
Thus, there's no reason to force people to do so, and there's no reason to open the door for universal registration.
Let me be more clear: If you do not care if you are selling to a criminal, you are unlikely to burden yourself with the requirement to run a background check, especially in that it is impossible to prove that you even owned the gun in the first place.You are , of course, wrong on that point.Legally selling a gun to someone doesn't qualify as an accessory.Accesory to whatever crime was committed with the weapon.Weren't you just proponnenting for UBCs?Oh, I don't believe anyone should be FORCED to run a background check.
What crime would that be?I just think that if a gun is used in a crime and it is proven that you sold/gave the gun to the person who committed the crime without running a background check that you should be charged with a crime.
I am.Be reasonable and realistic.
-If you want to make sure your sale is legal, you already have the capacity to run a check on the buyer.
-If you do not care, then you won't, regardless of the law.
Thus, there's no reason to force people to do so, and there's no reason to open the door for universal registration.
You telling the police that you bought a gun from me does not prove the sale, or my prior ownership.Oh, i CLEARLY stated that the gun would have to be proven to have came directly from you to the person who committed the crime with it. But let me tell you , as someone who has interrogated criminals before, people who do such things, they tend to not cover for people. IOW they rat people out, especially if there is a nice little carrot on the end of the line if they do.Let me be more clear: If you do not care if you are selling to a criminal, you are unlikely to burden yourself with the requirement to run a background check, especially in that it is impossible to prove that you even owned the gun in the first place.You are , of course, wrong on that point.Legally selling a gun to someone doesn't qualify as an accessory.Accesory to whatever crime was committed with the weapon.Weren't you just proponnenting for UBCs?
What crime would that be?
I am.Be reasonable and realistic.
-If you want to make sure your sale is legal, you already have the capacity to run a check on the buyer.
-If you do not care, then you won't, regardless of the law.
Thus, there's no reason to force people to do so, and there's no reason to open the door for universal registration.
OK... and?Let me be clear If you don't care if you are selling your gun to a criminal, I'm not that concerned with your rights. That's just the way it is.Let me be more clear: If you do not care if you are selling to a criminal, you are unlikely to burden yourself with the requirement to run a background check, especially in that it is impossible to prove that you even owned the gun in the first place.You are , of course, wrong on that point.Legally selling a gun to someone doesn't qualify as an accessory.Accesory to whatever crime was committed with the weapon.Weren't you just proponnenting for UBCs?
What crime would that be?
I am.Be reasonable and realistic.
-If you want to make sure your sale is legal, you already have the capacity to run a check on the buyer.
-If you do not care, then you won't, regardless of the law.
Thus, there's no reason to force people to do so, and there's no reason to open the door for universal registration.
Like wild dogs the gun nuts will come out defending the status quo which they know is broken. And these guys are who the politicians are afraid of because they are stupid and they vote.You have no idea what you;re talking about.They sell 1000 guns to a "dealer" who sells the guns to 20 guys who sell the guns to 1000 guys and who knows where those guns are. No biggy, they'll just make more. Who has all these guns? We don't know. It's insane. Put GPS on every gun. LOL Lojack.I assume she means illegal sales.Isn't the more important question "what unregulated flow are you talking about?"If we cannot prevent tee former crime, why do you think we can prevent the latter?Honest truth is nothing is going to prevent a but from shooting up a place. It's gonna happen occasionally.
But what we can do is stop the unregulated flow of guns onto our streets.
None of this sounds like you have anything of substance to add to the conversation.Like wild dogs the gun nuts will come out defending the status quo which they know is broken. And these guys are who the politicians are afraid of because they are stupid and they vote.You have no idea what you;re talking about.They sell 1000 guns to a "dealer" who sells the guns to 20 guys who sell the guns to 1000 guys and who knows where those guns are. No biggy, they'll just make more. Who has all these guns? We don't know. It's insane. Put GPS on every gun. LOL Lojack.I assume she means illegal sales.Isn't the more important question "what unregulated flow are you talking about?"If we cannot prevent tee former crime, why do you think we can prevent the latter?
You telling the police that you bought a gun from me does not prove the sale, or my prior ownership.Oh, i CLEARLY stated that the gun would have to be proven to have came directly from you to the person who committed the crime with it. But let me tell you , as someone who has interrogated criminals before, people who do such things, they tend to not cover for people. IOW they rat people out, especially if there is a nice little carrot on the end of the line if they do.Let me be more clear: If you do not care if you are selling to a criminal, you are unlikely to burden yourself with the requirement to run a background check, especially in that it is impossible to prove that you even owned the gun in the first place.You are , of course, wrong on that point.Legally selling a gun to someone doesn't qualify as an accessory.Accesory to whatever crime was committed with the weapon.
I am.Be reasonable and realistic.
-If you want to make sure your sale is legal, you already have the capacity to run a check on the buyer.
-If you do not care, then you won't, regardless of the law.
Thus, there's no reason to force people to do so, and there's no reason to open the door for universal registration.
Denial is not a river in Africa.None of this sounds like you have anything of substance to add to the conversation.Like wild dogs the gun nuts will come out defending the status quo which they know is broken. And these guys are who the politicians are afraid of because they are stupid and they vote.You have no idea what you;re talking about.They sell 1000 guns to a "dealer" who sells the guns to 20 guys who sell the guns to 1000 guys and who knows where those guns are. No biggy, they'll just make more. Who has all these guns? We don't know. It's insane. Put GPS on every gun. LOL Lojack.I assume she means illegal sales.Isn't the more important question "what unregulated flow are you talking about?"
Think about that -- think real hard - and get back to us.
Fingerprints, if any, prove that I handled it.LULZ you don't know much about forensic science if you don't think a gun can be traced to you once they have a name.You telling the police that you bought a gun from me does not prove the sale, or my prior ownership.Oh, i CLEARLY stated that the gun would have to be proven to have came directly from you to the person who committed the crime with it. But let me tell you , as someone who has interrogated criminals before, people who do such things, they tend to not cover for people. IOW they rat people out, especially if there is a nice little carrot on the end of the line if they do.Let me be more clear: If you do not care if you are selling to a criminal, you are unlikely to burden yourself with the requirement to run a background check, especially in that it is impossible to prove that you even owned the gun in the first place.You are , of course, wrong on that point.Legally selling a gun to someone doesn't qualify as an accessory.
I am.
-If you want to make sure your sale is legal, you already have the capacity to run a check on the buyer.
-If you do not care, then you won't, regardless of the law.
Thus, there's no reason to force people to do so, and there's no reason to open the door for universal registration.
So... conservatives should compromise?But, that is all fluff anyway. You, and others, outright refusal to budge on this, is going to lead to more of the same, liberals doing whatever they want without any input from conservatives.
