Why should there be “universal background checks” for firearms sales and transfers?

[Kosh]

Lots of people are getting hurt now because you guys see no problem with periodic massacres.

At least 25 Americans were killed during protests and political unrest in 2020

Findings from Armed Conflict Location and Event Data raise concerns about continued violence during and after election day

www.theguardian.com

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Lots of people are getting hurt now because you guys see no problem with periodic massacres.

And there are solutions that don't include violations of law abiding citizens Constitutional rights, but you loons don't want to hear them. This isn't about protecting the people. It's about disarming them.

 

[Leviticus]

Universals checks still wouldnt work since about 30% of criminal and mental health records arent being reported by state officials. Background checks rely on states sending peoples records to be included in the system and many records AREN'T being sent. More than a few mass shootings were committed by people who bought the guns legally who had histories that should have caused them to fail background checks, but their records were sent in for inclusion in the NICS

 

[candycorn]

And there are solutions that don't include violations of law abiding citizens Constitutional rights, but you loons don't want to hear them. This isn't about protecting the people. It's about disarming them.

Okay...what are they?

 

[Kosh]

Okay...what are they?

Thoughts and Prayers!

 

[DBA]

There is no nation on earth similar to the US to even compare us to.

Find a country with our physical size, 5,000 miles of unsecure borders, our racial and cultural demography, and our population and then lets have a talk.

These guys routinely compare the US to countries in Europe which are each on average the size of one of our 50 states. They obviously have little to no understanding of the role of demographics in policy-making and enforcement.

 

[woodwork201]

It makes it harder to get a gun. That is progress.

Again, it makes it harder to kill someone. Thats a win.

Fewer guns = fewer gun deaths.

But fewer guns does not equal fewer deaths.

Closing the border would mean 100 thousand fewer deaths a year but you're not crying out for that. You're just pushing for gun registration.

 

[Lesh]

But fewer guns does not equal fewer deaths.

Yea it does. Look at any first world country with strict gun regs

Closing the border would mean 100 thousand fewer deaths a year but you're not crying out for that. You're just pushing for gun registration.

Pure fantasy

 

[lennypartiv]

Some kids get killed at a school and knee jerk liberals want new laws passed.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yea it does. Look at any first world country with strict gun regs

This is where I ask you to demonstrate the necessary relationship bteween the gun laws of those countries and their lower rates of gun violence.
You will, as always, fail to do so.

Thus, your response, meaningless.

 

[Lesh]

This is where I ask you to demonstrate the necessary relationship bteween the gun laws of those countries and their lower rates of gun violence.
You will, as always, fail to do so.

 

[Lesh]

United Kingdom vs United States: Crime > Violent crime Facts and Stats

Murders, Murder rate per million people, Intentional homicide rate, Murder rate, Murders per million people

www.nationmaster.com

UK...4 times the murder rate in the US

 

[M14 Shooter]

View attachment 656626

As I predicted, you have, yet again, failed to demonstrate the necessary relationship between the gun laws of those countries and their lower rates of gun violence.
Keep up the good work.

 

[M14 Shooter]

United Kingdom vs United States: Crime > Violent crime Facts and Stats

Murders, Murder rate per million people, Intentional homicide rate, Murder rate, Murders per million people

www.nationmaster.com

UK...4 times the murder rate in the US

This is where I ask you to demonstrate the necessary relationship between the gun laws of the UK and its lower rates of gun violence.
You will, as always, fail to do so.

 

[Burgermeister]

Specifically why and specifically how will it stop shootings of 4 or more people in one incident?

Walk us through….specifically.

No idea how it will stop shootings, but the answer to the topic question is so that the government knows who has every gun (legal gun) so that when they get the power to confiscate them they know where they are.

 

[kaz]

If someone can't buy the gun, they can't shoot people...

LOL, Democrats are so stupid. Sure, sport, just like kids can't get drugs, they are illegal so they can't get them, right Virginia!?!??!

 

[woodwork201]

I see no good reason why a federal law should not be passed that requires a background check for any and every gun sold in a gun store, online, or gun show. Some states already do that, but IMHO every state should. Private sales are another matter, I don't think that can reasonably be done, BUT - if a crime is committed with a gun and the person with the gun has not passed a background check then that person should face additional penalties. I do not see how the 2nd Amendment rights of any law-abiding citizen would suffer under such a law. If I bought a gun via a private sale then I should make sure I have had a background check on myself done, and in fact there should be a website where anyone can do that. Moreover, if a gun owner discovers that any of his/her guns is missing then that person should file a report with the local police.

Look - there's no easy answer to the problem of gun violence and mass shootings. UBCs are not going to solve the problem, nobody is saying otherwise. But it can't hurt and if we keep a gun out of the hands of even one deranged shooter then isn't it worth it? I'm a gun owner myself, I passed a background check without issue, so why shouldn't every other wannabe gun owner do the same thing?

What a funny post.

Yes, background checks are a violation of the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. Having "prohibited persons" is unconstitutional. In fact, we had no such concept in this country until 1968 - the first 179 years of our country - and we didn't have a rash of mass shootings. In the years since the Gun Control Act was passed, gun violence of every type has escalated beyond belief.

Your idea of an additional criminal penalty if you use a gun in a crime that you didn't pass a background check to buy is very interesting - but stupid. If you bought a gun without a background check you'd hurry up and get one so that if you murder someone with your gun you're not in more trouble because you didn't have background check? Yeah, that's going to happen a LOT. Gang members are going to be buying guns out of the trunk of a stolen car and then rushing to the FFL for a background check.

When you pass laws that don't address the problem then you don't solve the problem. This is the problem with all of the gun controllers and their silly proposals; they just really don't think them through or understand the problem. But it does make for an occasional laugh.

 

[woodwork201]

Yea it does. Look at any first world country with strict gun regs

Pure fantasy

There's no demonstrable correlation between those countries' death rates and gun ownership. Japan's suicide rate is far beyond ours yet they have an almost total ban on private ownership of guns.

Violent crime and deaths are the product of culture, not guns. Our violent crime rate is higher because we let criminals walk and we put them in summer camp for attempted murder.

 

[woodwork201]

Let me know when they have 30,000 gun deaths a year.

As for the "they never had a guaranteed right to own firearms"....its strange how when new nations were formed well after ours was, they didn't look at each other while drafting the Constitutions of their nations and say, "Yep...we definitely need a 2nd Amendment". None of them wanted to import the mayhem that the 2nd Amendment has brought to the US.

The reason other countries don't have a second amendment is pretty close to what you're claiming but not exactly. What those countries fear is a population that has the ability to stand up to their tyranny. They see how the 2nd Amendment in the United States stands in the way of the communists and they definitely don't want that obstacle in their countries.

 

[task0778]

Yes, background checks are a violation of the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution.

No, they are not. That may be your opinion but to date this is not the case.

Your idea of an additional criminal penalty if you use a gun in a crime that you didn't pass a background check to buy is very interesting - but stupid.

Yeah, I misspoke there. If anyone uses a gun in a crime then they oughta face stiffer penalties than otherwise, whether they went through a BC or not.

When you pass laws that don't address the problem then you don't solve the problem.

Part of the problem is that too many people have access to guns that have not passed a BC. We ought to be doing what we can to reduce those occurrences, without influencing anyone else's 2nd Amendment rights. If you think that effort is silly or laughable, go ahead.