Why sane people oppose background checks

[Quantum Windbag]

Do you have a link?


You really have a problem with linking info you get from a website.

A 1997 Justice Department survey of more than 18,000 state and federal convicts revealed the truth:

• 39.6% of criminals obtained a gun from a friend or family member
• 39.2% of criminals obtained a gun on the street or from an illegal source
• 0.7% of criminals purchased a gun at a gun show
• 1% of criminals purchased a gun at a flea market
• 3.8% of criminals purchased a gun from a pawn shop
• 8.3% of criminals actually bought their guns from retail outlets



Read more: Where criminals get their guns | The Daily Caller

My link was from this century.

No it wasn't. In fact, you actually linked to a study from the exact same year to support your position.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

A 1997 Justice Department survey of more than 18,000 state and federal convicts revealed the truth:

• 39.6% of criminals obtained a gun from a friend or family member
• 39.2% of criminals obtained a gun on the street or from an illegal source
• 0.7% of criminals purchased a gun at a gun show
• 1% of criminals purchased a gun at a flea market
• 3.8% of criminals purchased a gun from a pawn shop
• 8.3% of criminals actually bought their guns from retail outlets



Read more: Where criminals get their guns | The Daily Caller

My link was from this century.

What was your link again?

She used a link to the Brady Campaign that links to the ATF study from the same year.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

.
“This is incredibly alarming,” said Justin Dedecker, a graduate student who sought a gun permit in 2011. “How does my performance in class become an indicator of my mental stability?”
]

Funny, let's look at that.

Loughner- Thrown out of his college because of his increasingly erratic behavior.
Cho- (The VA Shooter)- Thrown out of regular classes and privately tutored because his behavior was so disturbing.
Holmes- In the process of being removed from his Graduate program because he was losing his mind.

Hmmm..Three cases where if someone had "snooped" before letting these guys buy guns, a tragedy could have been averted.

We already know you are an asshole that thinks the police should be able to break the law if it helps them.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

If you support loopholes in background check laws, then you support maintaining the opportunity for convicted felons, and others who would not otherwise be able to legally obtain guns,

to be able to use the loopholes. You want the criminals to get the guns.

It's not anymore complicated than that.

If you support gun control you support rapists.

Personally, I would rather have a few criminals owning guns they don't use than having a woman get raped because you think no one should have a gun.

 

[Darkwind]

If you don't want background checks that is what you are advocating.

We already have background check laws in place.

Really? You don't say?
Read the thread title.

it may be that it is common practice for you to read ONLY the thread title and disregard the content that follows, however most of us do not.

The subject of the OP is why is it that Universities are handing over private information to government for use in background checks to purchase firearms.

Clearly, a violation of law and a good reason why people should be suspicious of new background checks used in addition to existing background checks.

Either way you slice it, the practice should be deemed illegal and the perps fined heavily.

 

[rightwinger]

Better that felons and the insane have unfettered access to the weapon of their choice than risk gun confiscation from paranoid gun owners

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Moral superiority? Um no.
I don't care if Joe Bob transfers his gun to his cousin. You still don't have to be a licensed gun dealer to sell guns at a gun show.
I am calling you guys retarded because you keep trying to pretend that isn't true.

Nobody is saying that, Luissa... Where do you get this shit? Private citizens are not required to perform background checks when they sell their private weapons, I've said that from Page 1. Where we get into difficulty is your perception that some vast amount of weapons are sold to criminals at gun shows.

Most criminals have NO DESIRE to go to a gun show, that's the purview of cops and good ole boys.

You, big rig, and QW keep repeating it. Sorry.
I have also posted a link where juveniles have been sold guns at gun shows, and actually account for 10% of juvenile gun crimes.
If you want to legally sell your gun to a family member go right ahead. If you want to sell guns at a gun show you should be required to perform a back ground check and/or ID your customer.
It's pretty simple.

I got a link that shows that the meteorite in Russia was an UFO.

Russians believe meteor strike could have been UFO or God`s message

It must be true, you can't lie on the internet.

 

[Darkwind]

Better that felons and the insane have unfettered access to the weapon of their choice than risk gun confiscation from paranoid gun owners

Confiscate guns and ONLY felons and the insane will be armed.

I have to wonder if you have some form of brain damage. This has been pointed out to you time and again.

 

[rightwinger]

Better that felons and the insane have unfettered access to the weapon of their choice than risk gun confiscation from paranoid gun owners

Confiscate guns and ONLY felons and the insane will be armed.

I have to wonder if you have some form of brain damage. This has been pointed out to you time and again.

They don't call them gun nuts for nothing

The degree of paranoia is astounding

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So lets see big rig posted that something like 1% of gun crimes are committed by guns purchased at gun shows, and QW posted that 2% of people incarcerated for gun crimes purchased them at gun shows.
That would 100+ deaths, and almost 600 injuries.
To me one is too many, but whateves.

No, I posted that a study that set out to prove that the gun show loophole is a major problem found that 2% of people incarcerated for gun crimes got their guns at a gun show. As I pointed out, the study did not make any reference to how many of those people were criminals when they actually bought their guns, and did not determine if they had background check or not prior to said purchase.

By the way, you are one of the reasons the government is so fucked up right now. The government does not exist to protect us from every conceivable danger. Any attempt to do so violates the rights of individuals who have done nothing illegal or immoral.

 

[Darkwind]

Better that felons and the insane have unfettered access to the weapon of their choice than risk gun confiscation from paranoid gun owners

Confiscate guns and ONLY felons and the insane will be armed.

I have to wonder if you have some form of brain damage. This has been pointed out to you time and again.

They don't call them gun nuts for nothing

The degree of paranoia is astounding

Very well. Prove that when guns are confiscated (it is your assertion, not mine) that felons and the insane WILL NOT be able to get them.

I won't wait up.

And you have the audacity to call others nuts? Fucking rights stealing nutjob.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Like I said, you can lose faith in your government but it is like you dont have faith in the constitution or the system the founding fathers set up............Like I said, my point flew far far far far far over your head. It is actually pretty funny to watch.

I am actually waiting for you to answer my DOL questions regarding driver's license...And exactly how you were trying to make a point with that..Because if you were trying to back up your point of view.. It would be quite hilarious. What I have to do to keep my driver licenses, is the number one reason why I wanted you to answer. But I don't think you will.

I did not lose faith in my government, I never had any faith in government at any point in my life. I watched as the government supported people who were fighting against rights in the 1960s, and I see the lack of tolerance now for people of different beliefs. That is happening because the government is becoming more secretive and less tolerant of individual freedom, not because the government is working to protect our rights. The system the Founders set up floundered when we went to war to prevent people from making their own choices. It has not improved since then.

The point I am trying to make with the drivers license is quite simple, there is no gun show loophole. You keep insisting that something that has nothing to do with gun shows somehow proves their is a loophole for gun shows. I try to point out how absurd that is by creating an equally stupid example, and you keep floundering because you insist that I am wrong and that you are right.

In summation, mocking your point of view is not an attempt to back up anything, it is just mocking your point of view.

Just answer the question, can you sell Guns at a gun show without being a dealer?
It is so simple but it's like the three of you have a mental block.
And as for license, no you didn't. You realized your statement was stupid after the fact.

Do you get a thrill out of repeating yourself?

By the way, since I live in California, I can honestly say that you cannot buy a gun at a gun show without getting a background check, yet politicians in this state still want to close the mythical gun show loophole.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Or does pointing out that this is happening prove I am paranoid?

Yup. Most, if nearly all Americans oppose making it legal for convicted criminals and certifiably mentally ill people to buy guns.

Here you embrace it.

Fucking moron.

I don't think anyone is arguing that. Good try though. So what is your position of Personal and Private Information on People who legally own guns, being released to the Press for Publication? Why isn't that a crime? Why are the people responsible for that still employed? That is criminal and there should be no excuse for it.

Did you skip the First Amendment on your way to the Second? Congress and the States shall make no law "...abriding freedom of speech, or of the press...".

 

[Luissa]

A 1997 Justice Department survey of more than 18,000 state and federal convicts revealed the truth:

• 39.6% of criminals obtained a gun from a friend or family member
• 39.2% of criminals obtained a gun on the street or from an illegal source
• 0.7% of criminals purchased a gun at a gun show
• 1% of criminals purchased a gun at a flea market
• 3.8% of criminals purchased a gun from a pawn shop
• 8.3% of criminals actually bought their guns from retail outlets



Read more: Where criminals get their guns | The Daily Caller

My link was from this century.

No it wasn't. In fact, you actually linked to a study from the exact same year to support your position.

Sure I did.

 

[Luissa]

I did not lose faith in my government, I never had any faith in government at any point in my life. I watched as the government supported people who were fighting against rights in the 1960s, and I see the lack of tolerance now for people of different beliefs. That is happening because the government is becoming more secretive and less tolerant of individual freedom, not because the government is working to protect our rights. The system the Founders set up floundered when we went to war to prevent people from making their own choices. It has not improved since then.

The point I am trying to make with the drivers license is quite simple, there is no gun show loophole. You keep insisting that something that has nothing to do with gun shows somehow proves their is a loophole for gun shows. I try to point out how absurd that is by creating an equally stupid example, and you keep floundering because you insist that I am wrong and that you are right.

In summation, mocking your point of view is not an attempt to back up anything, it is just mocking your point of view.

Just answer the question, can you sell Guns at a gun show without being a dealer?
It is so simple but it's like the three of you have a mental block.
And as for license, no you didn't. You realized your statement was stupid after the fact.

Do you get a thrill out of repeating yourself?

By the way, since I live in California, I can honestly say that you cannot buy a gun at a gun show without getting a background check, yet politicians in this state still want to close the mythical gun show loophole.

Still haven't answered. And no you can't, but you can in 33 other states.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I did not lose faith in my government, I never had any faith in government at any point in my life. I watched as the government supported people who were fighting against rights in the 1960s, and I see the lack of tolerance now for people of different beliefs. That is happening because the government is becoming more secretive and less tolerant of individual freedom, not because the government is working to protect our rights. The system the Founders set up floundered when we went to war to prevent people from making their own choices. It has not improved since then.

The point I am trying to make with the drivers license is quite simple, there is no gun show loophole. You keep insisting that something that has nothing to do with gun shows somehow proves their is a loophole for gun shows. I try to point out how absurd that is by creating an equally stupid example, and you keep floundering because you insist that I am wrong and that you are right.

In summation, mocking your point of view is not an attempt to back up anything, it is just mocking your point of view.

Just answer the question, can you sell Guns at a gun show without being a dealer?
It is so simple but it's like the three of you have a mental block.
And as for license, no you didn't. You realized your statement was stupid after the fact.

Do you get a thrill out of repeating yourself?

By the way, since I live in California, I can honestly say that you cannot buy a gun at a gun show without getting a background check, yet politicians in this state still want to close the mythical gun show loophole.

Can you buy one in the parking lot without a background check?

 

[Luissa]

So if you are not a criminal and do not want the guns in the hands of criminals, or juveniles why do you care if they require back ground checks when selling guns at a gun show?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Like I said, you can lose faith in your government but it is like you dont have faith in the constitution or the system the founding fathers set up............Like I said, my point flew far far far far far over your head. It is actually pretty funny to watch.

I am actually waiting for you to answer my DOL questions regarding driver's license...And exactly how you were trying to make a point with that..Because if you were trying to back up your point of view.. It would be quite hilarious. What I have to do to keep my driver licenses, is the number one reason why I wanted you to answer. But I don't think you will.

I did not lose faith in my government, I never had any faith in government at any point in my life. I watched as the government supported people who were fighting against rights in the 1960s, and I see the lack of tolerance now for people of different beliefs. That is happening because the government is becoming more secretive and less tolerant of individual freedom, not because the government is working to protect our rights. The system the Founders set up floundered when we went to war to prevent people from making their own choices. It has not improved since then.

The point I am trying to make with the drivers license is quite simple, there is no gun show loophole. You keep insisting that something that has nothing to do with gun shows somehow proves their is a loophole for gun shows. I try to point out how absurd that is by creating an equally stupid example, and you keep floundering because you insist that I am wrong and that you are right.

In summation, mocking your point of view is not an attempt to back up anything, it is just mocking your point of view.

Just answer the question, can you sell Guns at a gun show without being a dealer?

It is so simple but it's like the three of you have a mental block.
And as for license, no you didn't. You realized your statement was stupid after the fact.

Yes.

But what would be the mechanics/process of conducting a background check for private sales? What of sales at private homes or other private venues? It’s likely the number of private sales at gun shows make up a tiny percentage of overall private sales.

And the issue is further clouded in that we have no statistics as to private sales, regardless the location. Absent any facts or evidence the state is in no position to consider further restrictions.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Just answer the question, can you sell Guns at a gun show without being a dealer?
It is so simple but it's like the three of you have a mental block.
And as for license, no you didn't. You realized your statement was stupid after the fact.

Do you get a thrill out of repeating yourself?

By the way, since I live in California, I can honestly say that you cannot buy a gun at a gun show without getting a background check, yet politicians in this state still want to close the mythical gun show loophole.

Can you buy one in the parking lot without a background check?

Yes.

See post 199 for follow up question.

It’s incumbent upon those who take issue with private sales with no background check to also provide a solution as to how a background check would be conducted.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Yup. Most, if nearly all Americans oppose making it legal for convicted criminals and certifiably mentally ill people to buy guns.

Here you embrace it.

Fucking moron.

I don't think anyone is arguing that. Good try though. So what is your position of Personal and Private Information on People who legally own guns, being released to the Press for Publication? Why isn't that a crime? Why are the people responsible for that still employed? That is criminal and there should be no excuse for it.

Did you skip the First Amendment on your way to the Second? Congress and the States shall make no law "...abriding freedom of speech, or of the press...".

Correct.

The issue in the OP is what is or is not covered in the waiver.

But the First Amendment does indeed protect the press from prior restraint with regard to publishing public information, absent a compelling reason.