Executive Order background checks

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Please stop the sanity.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Spence, if I concede that there's no likely constitutional violation to these regulations, can you return the courtesy, and answer a question?

Here it is...let's say 250 get shot in Chicago in an average weekend. If we put these rules in place, how many less shootings can we expect in Chicago in an average weekend, as a direct result of these regulations? 3? 5?

Now, if we can save a few lives and not violate anyone's rights, we should do it.

But what will it take, exactly, for people on your side to agree to have the rest of the conversation that's required if we want to put a real dent in gun violence?

The right doesn't like to upset the NRA by curbing gun sales - that's fact. It's also fact that the left doesn't like to alienate urban blacks by telling them to knock it off, which is exactly what we need to be saying to the people in Chicago. The problem in Chicago isn't that these rules aren't yet law, and the problem obviously isn't white cops. The problem is that our culture is no longer embracing the kinds of values and behaviors that make one less inclined to shoot someone else.

Here's how I know that's true. In places that still embrace those values (or "cling" to them, as your beloved would say), there is very little gun crime.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Here it is...let's say 250 get shot in Chicago in an average weekend. If we put these rules in place, how many less shootings can we expect in Chicago in an average weekend, as a direct result of these regulations? 3? 5?

Given the number of guns already in the system most of these actions are a longer-term value proposition. If someone from Chicago can drive to a gun show in Texas and load up on handguns without a background check the local laws are never going be effective aside from perhaps increased penalties.

Yes, gang violence is a big issue but the easy availability of illegal guns is a major contributor to that violence. I read the ATF believes a majority of them come from only 8% of dealers but without good data and tracking they're hamstrung to clamp down.

It seems like a solid majority want universal background checks...even NRA membership. It's a piece of the puzzle, not the entire solution.

I had to get fingerprinted for my TSAPreCheck, I believe you have to get fingerprinted for a CCW, I've never owned a car that the Government wasn't aware of the VIN number.

The idea that creating a Federal database is going to make it easier for the Government to confiscate your weapons is just paranoid fearmongering to keep the NRA executives in power.

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by spence

Given the number of guns already in the system most of these actions are a longer-term value proposition. If someone from Chicago can drive to a gun show in Texas and load up on handguns without a background check the local laws are never going be effective aside from perhaps increased penalties.

Yes, gang violence is a big issue but the easy availability of illegal guns is a major contributor to that violence. I read the ATF believes a majority of them come from only 8% of dealers but without good data and tracking they're hamstrung to clamp down.

It seems like a solid majority want universal background checks...even NRA membership. It's a piece of the puzzle, not the entire solution.

I had to get fingerprinted for my TSAPreCheck, I believe you have to get fingerprinted for a CCW, I've never owned a car that the Government wasn't aware of the VIN number.

The idea that creating a Federal database is going to make it easier for the Government to confiscate your weapons is just paranoid fearmongering to keep the NRA executives in power.

Problem is that if they do choose to confiscate guns like Australia did they destroy them so family heirlooms and collectoins are gone forever.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

From Wikipedia:

"There are several versions of the text of the Second Amendment, each with capitalization or punctuation differences. Differences exist between the drafted and ratified copies, the signed copies on display, and various published transcriptions.[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23]

The importance (or lack thereof) of these differences has been the source of debate regarding the meaning and interpretation of the amendment, particularly regarding the importance of the prefatory clause.


One version was passed by the Congress.[24][25][26][27][28]

As passed by the Congress and preserved in the National Archives, with the rest of the original hand-written copy of the Bill of Rights prepared by scribe William Lambert:[29]

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, then-Secretary of State:[30]

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Playing devil's advocate here - my question is: Where does it say you can sell arms (ie guns)?

[scottw]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Playing devil's advocate here - my question is: Where does it say you can sell arms (ie guns)?

why would it?...read the entire Bill Of Rights...it is a list of restrictions on government and guarantees and protections of individual liberty....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Given the number of guns already in the system most of these actions are a longer-term value proposition. If someone from Chicago can drive to a gun show in Texas and load up on handguns without a background check the local laws are never going be effective aside from perhaps increased penalties.

Yes, gang violence is a big issue but the easy availability of illegal guns is a major contributor to that violence. I read the ATF believes a majority of them come from only 8% of dealers but without good data and tracking they're hamstrung to clamp down.

It seems like a solid majority want universal background checks...even NRA membership. It's a piece of the puzzle, not the entire solution.

I had to get fingerprinted for my TSAPreCheck, I believe you have to get fingerprinted for a CCW, I've never owned a car that the Government wasn't aware of the VIN number.

The idea that creating a Federal database is going to make it easier for the Government to confiscate your weapons is just paranoid fearmongering to keep the NRA executives in power.

"Given the number of guns already in the system most of these actions are a longer-term value proposition"

Agreed. Those guns in circulation will be there for 100 years. Obama's regs will have no real effectr.

Spence, if someone with a bad background decides they want to kill someone, do you really believe these regs will stop him? There are all kinds of ways for people who would fail background checks, to get guns.

"The idea that creating a Federal database is going to make it easier for the Government to confiscate your weapons is just paranoid "

Agreed on that.

This is such a small thing, in terms of making us safer. The effect on crime rates will barely be a rounding error.

[Rockport24]

Originally Posted by spence

Given the number of guns already in the system most of these actions are a longer-term value proposition. If someone from Chicago can drive to a gun show in Texas and load up on handguns without a background check the local laws are never going be effective aside from perhaps increased penalties.

Yes, gang violence is a big issue but the easy availability of illegal guns is a major contributor to that violence. I read the ATF believes a majority of them come from only 8% of dealers but without good data and tracking they're hamstrung to clamp down.

It seems like a solid majority want universal background checks...even NRA membership. It's a piece of the puzzle, not the entire solution.

I had to get fingerprinted for my TSAPreCheck, I believe you have to get fingerprinted for a CCW, I've never owned a car that the Government wasn't aware of the VIN number.

The idea that creating a Federal database is going to make it easier for the Government to confiscate your weapons is just paranoid fearmongering to keep the NRA executives in power.

Why not hire a few hundred more ATF agents and dedicate them to stopping the gun flow into Chicago? Even if they are purchased legally in texas, they are not be transferred legally in Chicago! Why hasn't Obama done this via executive order, which is fully his right to do? No, instead we are going to hire more people to do background checks, the majority of which will be of law-abiding citizens. Why don't we have law enforcement actually go after the known criminal activity?

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Rockport24

Why not hire a few hundred more ATF agents and dedicate them to stopping the gun flow into Chicago? Even if they are purchased legally in texas, they are not be transferred legally in Chicago! Why hasn't Obama done this via executive order, which is fully his right to do? No, instead we are going to hire more people to do background checks, the majority of which will be of law-abiding citizens. Why don't we have law enforcement actually go after the known criminal activity?

Because he doesn't want to put in jail his constituency
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device