Senate Rejects Expanded Gun Background Checks

[QUOTE="Serraph105"]

here's another point I would like you to consider, If I ever had a loved one get murdered due to getting shot with a gun I could never turn to the side you seem to love so much, and expect any sympathy. For all the moral grandstanding of the GOP, all the Christian rhetoric, all bullshit family oriented party crap that they spew, I could go speak to them, show them pictures of the people that I'd lost, and none of it would matter.

After this there is no way I could ever possibly believe that they would do the right thing, and try to keep this from happening to other people. After today the only thing I could ever expect from the GOP is to make an effort to keep me from getting any sort of justice.

airshocker

You aren't doing the right thing, though. You are punishing the majority for the crimes of the few. How you see this as being OK is beyond me.

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="Serraph105"]

here's another point I would like you to consider, If I ever had a loved one get murdered due to getting shot with a gun I could never turn to the side you seem to love so much, and expect any sympathy. For all the moral grandstanding of the GOP, all the Christian rhetoric, all bullshit family oriented party crap that they spew, I could go speak to them, show them pictures of the people that I'd lost, and none of it would matter.

After this there is no way I could ever possibly believe that they would do the right thing, and try to keep this from happening to other people. After today the only thing I could ever expect from the GOP is to make an effort to keep me from getting any sort of justice.

ferrari2001

You aren't doing the right thing, though. You are punishing the majority for the crimes of the few. How you see this as being OK is beyond me.

That's not a very good argument. The very idea of government says that we give up some of our rights and privileges as a means of protection so that we can pursue freedom. ferrari2001

I really don't care what you think of as a "good" argument. It's valid. The vast majority of gun owners do not committ crimes with their firearms. Yet you think it's perfectly fine to ban a weapon because of the way it looks? What sense does that make?

[QUOTE="ferrari2001"]That's not a very good argument. The very idea of government says that we give up some of our rights and privileges as a means of protection so that we can pursue freedom. airshocker

I really don't care what you think of as a "good" argument. It's valid. The vast majority of gun owners do not committ crimes with their firearms. Yet you think it's perfectly fine to ban a weapon because of the way it looks? What sense does that make?

I don't want to ban any weapons, however I wouldn't be opposed to greater restriction on sales and better background checks. Sometimes we have to give up some rights so that people have the chance to pursue freedom. ferrari2001

Restrictions on what, exactly? You want to restrict a semi-automatic rifle, something that is rarely used in these school shootings or other tragedies, but allow handguns to still be purchased with almost no issues? Even though they are the drivers of these gun crime statistics?

You guys make absolutely no sense.

[QUOTE="ferrari2001"]I don't want to ban any weapons, however I wouldn't be opposed to greater restriction on sales and better background checks. Sometimes we have to give up some rights so that people have the chance to pursue freedom. airshocker

Restrictions on what, exactly? You want to restrict a semi-automatic rifle, something that is rarely used in these school shootings or other tragedies, but allow handguns to still be purchased with almost no issues? Even though they are the drivers of these gun crime statistics?

You guys make absolutely no sense.

I want to make sure that only law-abiding citizens have access to legally sold weapons. Meaning we need to be more careful who we sell the guns to. Restrict locations those guns can be sold, make them available but easier to maintain and track. Plus you should have to undergo a background check whenever you buy a weapon, every single time. The guns will still be available but the sales better enforced. ferrari2001

Okay, I will go along with that once you people stop demonizing AR-15s and it is once again legal to purchase in the various states that have banned the sale of it. Until that happens, though, I see no reason to support what you'd like to do.

[QUOTE="ferrari2001"]I want to make sure that only law-abiding citizens have access to legally sold weapons. Meaning we need to be more careful who we sell the guns to. Restrict locations those guns can be sold, make them available but easier to maintain and track. Plus you should have to undergo a background check whenever you buy a weapon, every single time. The guns will still be available but the sales better enforced. airshocker

Okay, I will go along with that once you people stop demonizing AR-15s and it is once again legal to purchase in the various states that have banned the sale of it. Until that happens, though, I see no reason to support what you'd like to do.

[QUOTE="ferrari2001"][QUOTE="airshocker"]

Restrictions on what, exactly? You want to restrict a semi-automatic rifle, something that is rarely used in these school shootings or other tragedies, but allow handguns to still be purchased with almost no issues? Even though they are the drivers of these gun crime statistics?

You guys make absolutely no sense.

Wasdie

Hate to break it to you but the majority of mass shootings are committed by previously law-abiding citizens.

If everyone thought that way about every law there would be no laws. You can fight more than one fight at a time. I personally love shooting assault rifles, they are fun weapons to shoot, shot an ak about half a year back. We may not be able to purchase them but we can fight for that right back while at the same time fighting for better restrictions and enforcement. ferrari2001

The AR-15 is not an assault rifle.

And no, we can't. I've already lost too much freedom as it stands. I won't support a damn thing concerning gun control unless there's compromise.

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="Serraph105"]

here's another point I would like you to consider, If I ever had a loved one get murdered due to getting shot with a gun I could never turn to the side you seem to love so much, and expect any sympathy. For all the moral grandstanding of the GOP, all the Christian rhetoric, all bullshit family oriented party crap that they spew, I could go speak to them, show them pictures of the people that I'd lost, and none of it would matter.

After this there is no way I could ever possibly believe that they would do the right thing, and try to keep this from happening to other people. After today the only thing I could ever expect from the GOP is to make an effort to keep me from getting any sort of justice.

Serraph105

People can say what they want, but in my eyes you can't be a part of a group who watches a massacre like the one in Newtown, stops even a vote from happening, and still expect votes from anyone. You didn't just do nothing in the wake of a tragedy you actively kept other people from doing anything.

It got repealed recently by obama.

One reason why I like Obama.

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

countered by how 3/4 of gun deaths are from legally owned guns.

Wasdie

Sure, if you include suicides. 

I guess it's ok for somebody to be suicidal as long as they don't have a gun. Right?

Suicides tend to be impuse decisions, and if somebody can't fine a way to kill themselves in that 30 second window they are considering it, then they don't do it.

It's why most gun deaths of white people are suicides.

Background checks for guns. Psh. Firing a gun is all about the heat of the moment. Trying to rationalise things with these "tests" is so lame.SolidSnake35

You really have no place to speak. :lol:

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Rich3232"] No one has claimed that it's the ONLY way; just that it's one of the easiest way to kill yourself. Guy's point still stands. Rich3232

As for gun control....it's a complex issue with arguments to be made for both sides., And those that are the danger are those that don't see the point the other side is trying to make. I don't think anyone can honestly say the US has not a problem with the proliferation of guns compared to many other countries. I'm not going to say I have the answers but I don't think background checks are taking rights away. I think loopholes for gun shows should be closed.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

countered by how 3/4 of gun deaths are from legally owned guns.

MakeMeaSammitch

Sure, if you include suicides. 

I guess it's ok for somebody to be suicidal as long as they don't have a gun. Right?

Suicides tend to be impuse decisions, and if somebody can't fine a way to kill themselves in that 30 second window they are considering it, then they don't do it.

It's why most gun deaths of white people are suicides.

Well yea it is impuse, but using a firearm isn't the only way to kill yourself. Also just looking at how they commit suicde is ignoring why they are suicidal.

Uncivilised cowboys :P

I  am for background checks. I had to go through several of them recently. Each time. Requiring background checks during gun shows simply wouldn't work unless police is there to administer them themselves, which would just make things more complicated, costly, and most likely close most gun shows. Currently, all the gun shows I've been to people wouldn't sell a gun to a non permit holder. I think that's reasonable to only sell to gun permit holders as they are already certified and went through background checks. But that's not what this bill says. 

Good. That background check bill had barely any actual "background checks" in it, it was more of a way to sneak in registration then anything else. Also banning "assault weapons" would also be useless and stop no crime according to D.Feinstein herself between 300-350 people were killed by "assault rifles" since 2004 which is incredibly low number, that puts it between 33-39 people a year.

Also you can't ban magazines all it is, is a box with a spring in it, you can't ban a box with a spring in it. You can make them yourself if you take the time.

[QUOTE="Vickman178"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Why shouldn't guns be registered?LJS9502_basic

Well first of all in the U.S it is illegal for the Government to register guns. Plus registration usually means confiscation and the people do not want that.

EDIT:unless a certain state requires gun registration.

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Sure, if you include suicides. 

I guess it's ok for somebody to be suicidal as long as they don't have a gun. Right?

Chaos_HL21

Suicides tend to be impuse decisions, and if somebody can't fine a way to kill themselves in that 30 second window they are considering it, then they don't do it.

It's why most gun deaths of white people are suicides.

Well yea it is impuse, but using a firearm isn't the only way to kill yourself. Also just looking at how they commit suicde is ignoring why they are suicidal.

[QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"]

[QUOTE="MakeMeaSammitch"]actually one of the primary indicators of suicides are whether ther are guns in the home.

Suicides tend to be impuse decisions, and if somebody can't fine a way to kill themselves in that 30 second window they are considering it, then they don't do it.

It's why most gun deaths of white people are suicides.

Rich3232

Well yea it is impuse, but using a firearm isn't the only way to kill yourself. Also just looking at how they commit suicde is ignoring why they are suicidal.

[QUOTE="Rich3232"][QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"]

Well yea it is impuse, but using a firearm isn't the only way to kill yourself. Also just looking at how they commit suicde is ignoring why they are suicidal.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Rich3232"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Actually suicides tend to be planned and thought about for more than 30 seconds. LJS9502_basic

As for gun control....it's a complex issue with arguments to be made for both sides., And those that are the danger are those that don't see the point the other side is trying to make. I don't think anyone can honestly say the US has not a problem with the proliferation of guns compared to many other countries. I'm not going to say I have the answers but I don't think background checks are taking rights away. I think loopholes for gun shows should be closed.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Rich3232"] Sure they may plan for it, but it takes impulse to actually go through with it. Studies have shown that if you take away guns(most easy and "painless" method to commit suicide), then the suicide rate drops rapidly. Link to just valdiate my claims That said, I don't support gun control other than the basic restrictions I've already entioned earlier itt. Rich3232

As for gun control....it's a complex issue with arguments to be made for both sides., And those that are the danger are those that don't see the point the other side is trying to make. I don't think anyone can honestly say the US has not a problem with the proliferation of guns compared to many other countries. I'm not going to say I have the answers but I don't think background checks are taking rights away. I think loopholes for gun shows should be closed.

[QUOTE="Rich3232"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Well I'm sure some suicides are impulse....not all of them are. In fact in the metal health field they state that once the person becomes calm and stops talking about it is when they have made their decision. Nonetheless, guns are used by men more so than women....there are other means of suicide though by both sexes. I'm not sure why this has anything to do with guns and background checks.  Perhaps if a person at risk mentally is flagged it might stop some of that.

 

As for gun control....it's a complex issue with arguments to be made for both sides., And those that are the danger are those that don't see the point the other side is trying to make. I don't think anyone can honestly say the US has not a problem with the proliferation of guns compared to many other countries. I'm not going to say I have the answers but I don't think background checks are taking rights away. I think loopholes for gun shows should be closed.

LJS9502_basic

The idea of a new background check bill in the Senate is bogus. There is already the federal law requiring NICS check on EVERY purchase either online or from a local gunstore. If anyone here can buy a firearm without going through a background check I will pay for that firearm and you the cost of it again. Now private sales is another issue where you cannot regulate a private sale. How can you? But under the current law it is illegal to privately sell a firearm to individuals who are ineligible to own one. DevilMightCry

[QUOTE="Rich3232"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]That is where we differ than. I think any death is a waste.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Rich3232"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]In the argument for gun control one cannot escape the stats of the US vs other westernized countries. We don't lead by a little....but by a lot. And that should give pause to anyone's thought process. There is a problem.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="DevilMightCry"]The idea of a new background check bill in the Senate is bogus. There is already the federal law requiring NICS check on EVERY purchase either online or from a local gunstore. If anyone here can buy a firearm without going through a background check I will pay for that firearm and you the cost of it again. Now private sales is another issue where you cannot regulate a private sale. How can you? But under the current law it is illegal to privately sell a firearm to individuals who are ineligible to own one. LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="DevilMightCry"]The idea of a new background check bill in the Senate is bogus. There is already the federal law requiring NICS check on EVERY purchase either online or from a local gunstore. If anyone here can buy a firearm without going through a background check I will pay for that firearm and you the cost of it again. Now private sales is another issue where you cannot regulate a private sale. How can you? But under the current law it is illegal to privately sell a firearm to individuals who are ineligible to own one. DevilMightCry

[QUOTE="DevilMightCry"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Guns are already registered though.....KC_Hokie

EDIT:unless a certain state requires gun registration.

They don't keep track of who owns the gun. They just keep record of all weapons either imported or produced. This is the same for a lot of products on the market too. They just want to know what's out there and it's much easier to track movement of a weapon that way. It assists with crime investigations and whatnot.

What we're trying to avoid is tying a name to that serial number on any level of government or even private institution.

[QUOTE="Rich3232"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]What percentage of deaths is due to DUI? I think we have to tackle that first. Second the drunk made a very poor decision but his thought isn't the same as the person who points and shoots deliberately is it?LJS9502_basic

They can track weapons back to the owners via serial numbers. Detectives, FBI, etc. can always find that information out.KC_Hokie

It's not that easy. This isn't some TV show where the FBI has all of these fancy tracking tools that somehow defy logic.

It takes some extensive work and they only get a rough estimate of who may own the weapon. If the serial number is scratched off of a firearm (which is illegal I believe) it becomes practically impossible. 

It's not the same as a national gun registry nor can be used the same. 

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]

It's not that easy. This isn't some TV show where the FBI has all of these fancy tracking tools that somehow defy logic.

Wasdie

No they don't. They do not attach owners information. That is currently illegal as that is essentially gun registration.

There isn't some national database like on some t.v. show, but yes the ATF have all legal sales information after a certain date.

It's called the National Tracing Center.