The Gun Owner Database- Another Way To Skin The Cat

[Marion Morrison]

You may think that, break bad and get your hopes crushed into oblivion, Commie.

Oh, I know it. Weren't you busy yelling at the clouds or something?

Last I recall, I was challenging your commie self to break and let things play out where they may, baby boy.

Challenging me to break? Not really sure what that is or why I would be interested, Mary.

Try to take our weapons, commie leftist, you will rue the day, I bet that.

We will come during your nap time. Probably be weeks before you even notice.

Bitch, I can be on watch and arrow you right through the fucking head when you step out your front door.


Not saying I plan to or am going to do that, but know this, motherfucker: I can.

It's entirely possible.

Like I don't know how to shoot a bow since 1990 or something. Chump.

Also, I've been hunting since before that, bitch.

I do not like traitorous assholes like you, keep well away from me, k?

 

[Vastator]

Feds order Apple and Google to turn over names in data base of gunscope app users...
Exclusive: Feds Demand Apple And Google Hand Over Names Of 10,000+ Users Of A Gun Scope App

Someone should challenge this in court. This seems clearly illegal.

Yeah... I bet your masters will get right on that...

Do you fuckers even realize that you've already lost your country, not to mention your freedom?! Look at the terms in which you speak of your hired help, "government employees". You cocksuckers cower to them. You're broken, conquered, defeated people.
FUUUUUK!!!!! Stand and fucking fight for christ sake! If not for your "God"..; for the freedom of your children. Fight,god damn you!

 

[M14 Shooter]

Nope, background checks are constitutional.

Please cite the holding from the USSC to that effect.

Please cite the holding that yelling fire in a crowed theater is protected by the 1st amendment.

What';s that? You -cannot- cite the ruling form the USSC that held background checks are constitutional?
Thought not.
Concession accepted.

Why did you remove the rest of my post? You're a dishonest poster.

Nothing here changes the fact you cannot cite a ruling from the USSC that supports your claim.

When you find the testicular fortitude necessary to address post #236, let us know.

 

[HappyJoy]

Nope, background checks are constitutional.

Please cite the holding from the USSC to that effect.

Please cite the holding that yelling fire in a crowed theater is protected by the 1st amendment.

What';s that? You -cannot- cite the ruling form the USSC that held background checks are constitutional?
Thought not.
Concession accepted.

Why did you remove the rest of my post? You're a dishonest poster.

Nothing here changes the fact you cannot cite a ruling from the USSC that supports your claim.

When you find the testicular fortitude necessary to address post #236, let us know.

Sorry, bud. I pointed you to a conservative source who explains the constitutionality of a background check.

 

[jc456]

Yep, I think if the gun wasn't used in a crime then perhaps a hefty fine. If the gun was used in a crime then they are an accomplice to it.

No, accomplice liability requires some foreknowledge of the crime. But states can mandate people store, sell, loan their firearms in certain ways. A misdemeanor fine can get up into the thousands. I'd get people's attention.

States do mandate that, as I already said. That’s not new! So far, I’ve not heard one thing new from anyone! Why not except that crazy fks are crazy fks and nobody knows where or when a crazy fk goes off. Sorry, that’s just fact!stop trying to punish law abiding citizens who have nothing to do with the crime! Fk

Not all gun sales go through a background check. I'm not sure what the hell you're talking about.

The fk they don’t.

There is no federal requirement to perform a background check on private sales. Some states require a background check for any transfer. They are usually blueish in color. The red ones, not so much.

These states require an additional check to some degree and the rest fall back to whatever the federal requirement is:
California25
Colorado26
Connecticut27
Delaware28
District of Columbia29
Maryland (handguns and assault weapons only)30
Nevada (effective January 2, 2020)31
New Jersey32
New Mexico (Does not apply to transfers that are not commercial sales. Effective July 1, 2019)33
New York34
Oregon35
Pennsylvania (handguns only)36
Rhode Island37
Vermont38
Washington39


So, fuck off and read something every now and again.

A private gun sale is what?

 

[jc456]

Please cite the holding from the USSC to that effect.

Please cite the holding that yelling fire in a crowed theater is protected by the 1st amendment.

What';s that? You -cannot- cite the ruling form the USSC that held background checks are constitutional?
Thought not.
Concession accepted.

Why did you remove the rest of my post? You're a dishonest poster.

Nothing here changes the fact you cannot cite a ruling from the USSC that supports your claim.

When you find the testicular fortitude necessary to address post #236, let us know.

Sorry, bud. I pointed you to a conservative source who explains the constitutionality of a background check.

Background checks exist

 

[skye]

just something off topic if I may?


I absolutely hate that stupid expression "to skin a cat"

Stupid

 

[OKTexas]

Feds order Apple and Google to turn over names in data base of gunscope app users...
Exclusive: Feds Demand Apple And Google Hand Over Names Of 10,000+ Users Of A Gun Scope App

Why arent people made to register their guns. It would make it easier to manage.

You mean other than there's a federal law against it.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Feds order Apple and Google to turn over names in data base of gunscope app users...
Exclusive: Feds Demand Apple And Google Hand Over Names Of 10,000+ Users Of A Gun Scope App

Apple and Google. being Apple and Google, likely cannot say yes fast enough.

OMG, it's Clown World! They can see I have 2 guns.

That background check stuff is gun registration.

They don't "lose" the info after 90 days, they distribute it to other government agencies.

Nope, law says it has to be destroyed after 24 hours if the check is successful.

Records of successful transactions are kept for 24 hours. In other words, if you submit the paperwork to buy a firearm and the background check is submitted to their database, it’s only retained for 24 hours before being deleted IF you weren’t denied. However, the number of transactions and the date(s) are kept on file for 90 days.

How Long Does NICS Keep Purchase Records? - The Truth About Guns

.

 

[OKTexas]

If guns were registered when sold then gun safety would improve. For example there could be checks that they were stored correctly and away from kids. Thats a good thing in my opinion.

Yeah, just screw that thing called the 4th Amendment. How would you like cops coming into your house unannounced and with no cause to verify your knives are stored safely?

.

 

[skye]

DO NOT

use the expression to skin a cat

OK?????? IT IS NOT A NICE EXPRESSION

we love our cats

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Feds order Apple and Google to turn over names in data base of gunscope app users...
Exclusive: Feds Demand Apple And Google Hand Over Names Of 10,000+ Users Of A Gun Scope App

Why arent people made to register their guns. It would make it easier to manage.

In a country of 300 million? Sure.

By the way, Canada tried that already and gave up.

 

[OKTexas]

I want 50 state reciprocity, rather than 50+ state; you get nothing.
There - I compromised.

This is why I don't compromise with extremists.

I took the exact same view on compromise as you did, and -I'm- the extremist

People like you are why gun owners refuse to give an inch.

You're an extremist because 80-90% of the population agrees with me. Who did you bring to the party, wingnut?

LMAO, hell they don't even know what you're talking about, much less agree with you.

.

 

[HappyJoy]

I want 50 state reciprocity, rather than 50+ state; you get nothing.
There - I compromised.

This is why I don't compromise with extremists.

I took the exact same view on compromise as you did, and -I'm- the extremist

People like you are why gun owners refuse to give an inch.

You're an extremist because 80-90% of the population agrees with me. Who did you bring to the party, wingnut?

LMAO, hell they don't even know what you're talking about, much less agree with you.

.

Background checks? I think pretty much everyone is aware of the subject and most Americans do agree. Thanks for contributing nothing.

 

[OKTexas]

I want 50 state reciprocity, rather than 50+ state; you get nothing.
There - I compromised.

This is why I don't compromise with extremists.

I took the exact same view on compromise as you did, and -I'm- the extremist

People like you are why gun owners refuse to give an inch.

You're an extremist because 80-90% of the population agrees with me. Who did you bring to the party, wingnut?

LMAO, hell they don't even know what you're talking about, much less agree with you.

.

Background checks? I think pretty much everyone is aware of the subject and most Americans do agree. Thanks for contributing nothing.

This fantasy idea of "universal background checks", is totally unworkable as proposed. People only know the propaganda, not the reality of what it would require to be effective. Hell I don't even think you know what would be required, so you're spewing commie talking points instead of using your brain.

.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Yes, I think we are. I do not foresee a violent revolution by 30-40% of the population that is going to overtake the U.S. government.

Government? Why not commie faggots like you? Government is less of a problem.

The Revolutionary war was won by about 27% of the men fighting.

The pussies fled to Canada or didn't fight.

 

[Rustic]

DO NOT

use the expression to skin a cat

OK?????? IT IS NOT A NICE EXPRESSION

we love our cats

Meow

 

[Marion Morrison]

just something off topic if I may?


I absolutely hate that stupid expression "to skin a cat"

Stupid

I have never skinned a cat. I have skinned rabbits, squirrels, and Diamondbacks, though. I don't kill non-poisonous snakes.

Probably should have killed 1 moccasin, but I never did.

I did pop him with a cocking Daisy lowest-power-ever BB gun.

He had this 1 area in the woods and I knew to look out for him. He'd get ya if he could. I just was wary around his area.
Hah! He was coming at me and I popped him with the POS Daisy.
He turned around and left me alone..that day.
Came at me a few other times, too. I really should have killed that SOB.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Please cite the holding from the USSC to that effect.

Please cite the holding that yelling fire in a crowed theater is protected by the 1st amendment.

What';s that? You -cannot- cite the ruling form the USSC that held background checks are constitutional?
Thought not.
Concession accepted.

Why did you remove the rest of my post? You're a dishonest poster.

Nothing here changes the fact you cannot cite a ruling from the USSC that supports your claim.
When you find the testicular fortitude necessary to address post #236, let us know.

Sorry, bud. I pointed you to a conservative source who explains the constitutionality of a background check.

All these words, and none of them address the issue put to you.
Nothing here changes the fact you cannot cite a ruling from the USSC that supports your claim.
When you find the testicular fortitude necessary to address post #236, let us know.

 

[HappyJoy]

Please cite the holding that yelling fire in a crowed theater is protected by the 1st amendment.

What';s that? You -cannot- cite the ruling form the USSC that held background checks are constitutional?
Thought not.
Concession accepted.

Why did you remove the rest of my post? You're a dishonest poster.

Nothing here changes the fact you cannot cite a ruling from the USSC that supports your claim.
When you find the testicular fortitude necessary to address post #236, let us know.

Sorry, bud. I pointed you to a conservative source who explains the constitutionality of a background check.

All these words, and none of them address the issue put to you.
Nothing here changes the fact you cannot cite a ruling from the USSC that supports your claim.
When you find the testicular fortitude necessary to address post #236, let us know.

You go girl. In the meantime the Supreme court has declined to review cases where the lower courts have decided background checks are lawful.

They didn't even merit the Supreme Court's time.