Why are background checks for guns "off the table?"

2,408 Views | 33 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by YoakDaddy
CammoTX
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It is being reported that Trump has told the NRA that universal background checks are off the table.

Why?

I am a responsible gun owner of many guns, and I want universal background checks!

I honestly don't get this.
YoakDaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Because background checks are already performed and private sales would then require all sellers to become licensed to check backgrounds of buyers. That's my understanding. Plus, criminals don't give a shlt about laws.
El Oso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
After hearing from NRA leaders over the past week, the president stopped talking about instituting such checks, emphasizing instead the need to keep guns away from people who are mentally disturbed. He noted in recent days that the country already has "very strong background checks," a position that aligns with that of the NRA leadership.

What SPECIFICALLY are you wanting checked that is not already checked for at the time of sale?
Mitch Blood Green
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CammoTX said:

It is being reported that Trump has told the NRA that universal background checks are off the table.

Why?

I am a responsible gun owner of many guns, and I want universal background checks!

I honestly don't get this.


Senate won't bring a vote to the floor. We've lost lots due to partisanship and special interests.
GoneGirl
How long do you want to ignore this user?
They were never on the table.
YoakDaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jinx 2 said:

They were never on the table.

Yes they were and LaPierre was for a UBC until he heard from his constituency.
blackie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
YoakDaddy said:

Jinx 2 said:

They were never on the table.

Yes they were and LaPierre was for a UBC until he heard from his constituency.
His constituency should not be able to overrule the wishes of 90+% of the American people. Is your definition of democratic rule that ten percent, if that, should outweigh the ninety percent?

Yes criminals don't obey laws, bit many of these shooters show no criminal history and probably have no inclination to go rob a store or run drugs. They just want to kill certain groups of people. Yes, they may be mentally iill and that needs to be addressed, but had a background check stopped even just one, a lot of families would not be going through what they are. However you do it, every person who owns a gun should be checked as to whether of not they have shown criminal OR mental or otherwise dangerous actions in the past to the extent possible. This control of our country by the NRA is beyond any justification. At some point, the Dems will be in control. Better for you to pass this now while you still have some say in it. That won't last forever.
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Only people who have NEVER bought a gun possibly fall for this BS Democrats are always spouting, that you can walk into Walmart or Academy store, drop some cash on the counter, and walk out with a handgun or an AR-15 with no background check.

They lie about this all the time.


Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
They wouldn't work, and their failure would become the reason for the next new regulation, which would also fail, and so on.
CammoTX
How long do you want to ignore this user?
YoakDaddy said:

Because background checks are already performed and private sales would then require all sellers to become licensed to check backgrounds of buyers. That's my understanding. Plus, criminals don't give a shlt about laws.
There has got to be a way for me to sell a gun (specifically a handgun) to a third party without becoming licensed, but that whoever buys from me must also go through the same FBI check that I do when I purchase a gun at a gun show.
drahthaar
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The "yellow sheet" background check when you purchase from an FFL dealer only tells the dealer what is not there: criminal record etc. What we DO NOT want is the Fed compiling details records on every citizen in this regard...I think that is what most folks fear, and rightly so.

Something along the line of state concealed carry licenses might have some merit and traction since the FBI background check is included.

The notion of healthcare providers being a gate-keeper in this regard is ludicrous. A truly mentally ill patient is one thing. The problem is their used of a broad brush in determining who is "healthy" enough to owner possess firearms is far out of their expertise. Those guys can't even decide what "mental illness" is.
El Oso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CammoTX said:

YoakDaddy said:

Because background checks are already performed and private sales would then require all sellers to become licensed to check backgrounds of buyers. That's my understanding. Plus, criminals don't give a shlt about laws.
There has got to be a way for me to sell a gun (specifically a handgun) to a third party without becoming licensed, but that whoever buys from me must also go through the same FBI check that I do when I purchase a gun at a gun show.


In Texas, you can sell to a LTC holder this way. I offer to buy your gun, we meet, I show you my LTC, you call the hotline and verify my license is active. You dont need an FFL and you can rest assured I would have passed the mandated background check. Because I already did.

We could even meet at a police station and have tgem scan the bar code. No pbone call needed.
El Oso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
witchmo said:

The "yellow sheet" background check when you purchase from an FFL dealer only tells the dealer what is not there: criminal record etc. What we DO NOT want is the Fed compiling details records on every citizen in this regard...I think that is what most folks fear, and rightly so.

Something along the line of state concealed carry licenses might have some merit and traction since the FBI background check is included.

The notion of healthcare providers being a gate-keeper in this regard is ludicrous. A truly mentally ill patient is one thing. The problem is their used of a broad brush in determining who is "healthy" enough to owner possess firearms is far out of their expertise. Those guys can't even decide what "mental illness" is.


Exactly. I see a counselor every so often to keep me from being mentally unhealthy.

I have a legitimate fear that that info may be used against me some day because people dont understand mental health.

I see looks in eyes change when I tell people I see a counselor. It's not a positive look.
xiledinok
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Move to a state with constitutional carry. You won't worry about gun control. Gun control will never be solved in Washington. Different strokes, for different folks.

Buy from individuals or at shows. Give the government little information as possible. All good rules for firearm owners.
curtpenn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CammoTX said:

It is being reported that Trump has told the NRA that universal background checks are off the table.

Why?

I am a responsible gun owner of many guns, and I want universal background checks!

I honestly don't get this.
I can't speak for others, but I would say that adding another layer of governmental regulation will not accomplish anything other than to make life more difficult for "normal" people. It also falls into the "slippery slope" category. So, I am opposed.

Looking at H.R.8 - Bipartisan (lolz) Background Checks Act of 2019, I do see that an amendment has been proposed to allow sales to those who have passed the TSA Pre-Check program of DHS. Perhaps it could be something as simple for you as only selling to those who have passed?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/8/amendments
blackie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Let's look at this from a different angle. Full disclosure...I don't own a gun nor want a gun or really be around anyone who is openly carrying. That being said my son in law is a collector and owns many guns. I have no problem with that.

But can anyone name a single thing that over 90 percent or the American public want that Congress doesn't adopt within a reasonable time. My irritation is that the people in Congress that do lap dances for the NRA ignore the will of their constituents and let a very small organization in relation to the population get whatever they want or prevent things they don't want. Not to mention that a not so small percentage of NRA members want UBCs.

Anyone know of anything......anything where the overwhelming desires of the American voter get completely buried?
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
blackie said:

Let's look at this from a different angle. Full disclosure...I don't own a gun nor want a gun or really be around anyone who is openly carrying. That being said my son in law is a collector and owns many guns. I have no problem with that.

But can anyone name a single thing that over 90 percent or the American public want that Congress doesn't adopt within a reasonable time. My irritation is that the people in Congress that do lap dances for the NRA ignore the will of their constituents and let a very small organization in relation to the population get whatever they want or prevent things they don't want. Not to mention that a not so small percentage of NRA members want UBCs.

Anyone know of anything......anything where the overwhelming desires of the American voter get completely buried?
About 3/4 of Americans think flag-burning should be illegal, but it's constitutionally protected. Majority rule wasn't the intention of the Founders.
blackie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

blackie said:

Let's look at this from a different angle. Full disclosure...I don't own a gun nor want a gun or really be around anyone who is openly carrying. That being said my son in law is a collector and owns many guns. I have no problem with that.

But can anyone name a single thing that over 90 percent or the American public want that Congress doesn't adopt within a reasonable time. My irritation is that the people in Congress that do lap dances for the NRA ignore the will of their constituents and let a very small organization in relation to the population get whatever they want or prevent things they don't want. Not to mention that a not so small percentage of NRA members want UBCs.

Anyone know of anything......anything where the overwhelming desires of the American voter get completely buried?
About 3/4 of Americans think flag-burning should be illegal, but it's constitutionally protected. Majority rule wasn't the intention of the Founders.
Thank you for an example. However, do you believe that if this (flag burning) was a real concern of the populace (to the level of UBCs) and were pushing their representatives to enact such a constitutional amendment they would ignore them? I don't think they would. I think they would act. But it is just not that high a priority. Has anyone been killed by a flag being burned or not burned?

And it still gets back to the same thing. How can one small organization dictate to the President of the United States and enough members of Congress on what they should do when the overwhelming majority of citizens, by anyone's standards, want otherwise. I doubt seriously that the Founding Fathers had in mind that small groups in the population should be able to dictate to everyone else.

It gets down to two options. If we adhere solely to the second amendment then everyone should be able to get guns without restriction, regardless of mental capabilities or intent. Is that what we want? Apparently that was decided years ago since we already have gun laws. Then how do UBCs prevent anyone that can be a responsible gun owner from owning guns? Perhaps they won't make a difference. That however, is not a reason to not have them.

In the end, I don't think it will matter what is said here today. Within 10 years does anyone really think there will not be UBCs? The NRA cannot hold this off forever, especially considering that states are already taking action on their own. The NRA has bigger problems on their plate than worrying about whether or not there are UBCs.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
blackie said:

Sam Lowry said:

blackie said:

Let's look at this from a different angle. Full disclosure...I don't own a gun nor want a gun or really be around anyone who is openly carrying. That being said my son in law is a collector and owns many guns. I have no problem with that.

But can anyone name a single thing that over 90 percent or the American public want that Congress doesn't adopt within a reasonable time. My irritation is that the people in Congress that do lap dances for the NRA ignore the will of their constituents and let a very small organization in relation to the population get whatever they want or prevent things they don't want. Not to mention that a not so small percentage of NRA members want UBCs.

Anyone know of anything......anything where the overwhelming desires of the American voter get completely buried?
About 3/4 of Americans think flag-burning should be illegal, but it's constitutionally protected. Majority rule wasn't the intention of the Founders.
Thank you for an example. However, do you believe that if this (flag burning) was a real concern of the populace (to the level of UBCs) and were pushing their representatives to enact such a constitutional amendment they would ignore them? I don't think they would. I think they would act. But it is just not that high a priority. Has anyone been killed by a flag being burned or not burned?

And it still gets back to the same thing. How can one small organization dictate to the President of the United States and enough members of Congress on what they should do when the overwhelming majority of citizens, by anyone's standards, want otherwise. I doubt seriously that the Founding Fathers had in mind that small groups in the population should be able to dictate to everyone else.

It gets down to two options. If we adhere solely to the second amendment then everyone should be able to get guns without restriction, regardless of mental capabilities or intent. Is that what we want? Apparently that was decided years ago since we already have gun laws. Then how do UBCs prevent anyone that can be a responsible gun owner from owning guns? Perhaps they won't make a difference. That however, is not a reason to not have them.

In the end, I don't think it will matter what is said here today. Within 10 years does anyone really think there will not be UBCs? The NRA cannot hold this off forever, especially considering that states are already taking action on their own. The NRA has bigger problems on their plate than worrying about whether or not there are UBCs.
You're welcome. I don't know that UBCs are a high priority, either. Even anti-gun activists don't seem that enthusiastic about them. They're more interested in things like an assault weapons ban.
El Oso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
blackie said:

Let's look at this from a different angle. Full disclosure...I don't own a gun nor want a gun or really be around anyone who is openly carrying. That being said my son in law is a collector and owns many guns. I have no problem with that.

But can anyone name a single thing that over 90 percent or the American public want that Congress doesn't adopt within a reasonable time. My irritation is that the people in Congress that do lap dances for the NRA ignore the will of their constituents and let a very small organization in relation to the population get whatever they want or prevent things they don't want. Not to mention that a not so small percentage of NRA members want UBCs.

Anyone know of anything......anything where the overwhelming desires of the American voter get completely buried?


I question the validity of the 90% stat. I know it comes from a variety of polls that get the same data, but consider the elections in the last two states to let voters decide. Both in 2016.

In Nevada, Question 1 passed by less than one percentage point. Supporters of the background check proposition spent $18,913,032.54, or $33.86 per vote. Opponents of the measure spent $6,639,608.20 or $12.10 per vote. Read that first sentence one more time. Nowhere close to 90%.

Question 3 in Maine, requiring background checks for sales by non-licensed dealers, was defeated by 3.6 percentage points despite a more than five-to-one spending advantage in favor of the pro-Yes side. Read that first sentence one more time. It lost!

So exactly where is this 90%?
El Oso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's also interesting to look at how Americans responded to other questions Gallup asked in that same poll where they got 90%

As I read those numbers, a lot of the outrage over guns just doesn't exist.

But still, why would 90% say one thing and elections about that thing are decided by razor thin margins?

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx
blackie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
El Oso said:

blackie said:

Let's look at this from a different angle. Full disclosure...I don't own a gun nor want a gun or really be around anyone who is openly carrying. That being said my son in law is a collector and owns many guns. I have no problem with that.

But can anyone name a single thing that over 90 percent or the American public want that Congress doesn't adopt within a reasonable time. My irritation is that the people in Congress that do lap dances for the NRA ignore the will of their constituents and let a very small organization in relation to the population get whatever they want or prevent things they don't want. Not to mention that a not so small percentage of NRA members want UBCs.

Anyone know of anything......anything where the overwhelming desires of the American voter get completely buried?


I question the validity of the 90% stat. I know it comes from a variety of polls that get the same data, but consider the elections in the last two states to let voters decide. Both in 2016.

In Nevada, Question 1 passed by less than one percentage point. Supporters of the background check proposition spent $18,913,032.54, or $33.86 per vote. Opponents of the measure spent $6,639,608.20 or $12.10 per vote. Read that first sentence one more time. Nowhere close to 90%.

Question 3 in Maine, requiring background checks for sales by non-licensed dealers, was defeated by 3.6 percentage points despite a more than five-to-one spending advantage in favor of the pro-Yes side. Read that first sentence one more time. It lost!

So exactly where is this 90%?
Do you think that there has been a change in attitude since 2016. That is a long time ago in today's world. Considering all the high profile incidents we have seen of late that might explain at least some of it. It would be interesting to know how Nevada would turn out now.
El Oso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It would be the same. Thats why I followed up with Gallup poll numbers from recently.

(Asked of those dissatisfied with U.S. gun policy) Would you like to see gun laws in this country made more strict, less strict, or remain as they are?
46% think more strict 39% say status quo 8% say less strict.

39+8=47

Were right back at that razor thin margin.
El Oso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Are you for or against a law which would make it illegal to manufacture, sell or possess semi-automatic guns known as assault rifles?

57% against.

Second highest support against number in 20 yrs.
El Oso
How long do you want to ignore this user?

What is your overall opinion of the National Rifle Association, also known as the NRA -- is it very favorable, mostly favorable, mostly unfavorable or very unfavorable?

53% have amost favorable to highly favorable opinion. Not what the media tells me.
cinque
How long do you want to ignore this user?
YoakDaddy said:

Jinx 2 said:

They were never on the table.

Yes they were and LaPierre was for a UBC until he heard from his constituency.
Nope:

Most Americans in a new poll support stricter gun regulations, with even a majority of National Rifle Association in the survey backing stiffer background checks.
Sixty-nine percent of NRA members expressed support for comprehensive background checks. A proposal to implement universal background checks would apply to all gun sales, rather than just purchases made at licensed retailers, according to the Giffords Law Center, a gun control advocacy group.
To continue reading this article, you must be a Bloomberg News subscriber.
Try 3 months for $6. Cancel anytime.
View Offers
YoakDaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
blackie said:

YoakDaddy said:

Jinx 2 said:

They were never on the table.

Yes they were and LaPierre was for a UBC until he heard from his constituency.
His constituency should not be able to overrule the wishes of 90+% of the American people. Is your definition of democratic rule that ten percent, if that, should outweigh the ninety percent?

Yes criminals don't obey laws, bit many of these shooters show no criminal history and probably have no inclination to go rob a store or run drugs. They just want to kill certain groups of people. Yes, they may be mentally iill and that needs to be addressed, but had a background check stopped even just one, a lot of families would not be going through what they are. However you do it, every person who owns a gun should be checked as to whether of not they have shown criminal OR mental or otherwise dangerous actions in the past to the extent possible. This control of our country by the NRA is beyond any justification. At some point, the Dems will be in control. Better for you to pass this now while you still have some say in it. That won't last forever.

I was responding to Jinx with what I'd read. I can't help what the NRA did. I'm not even a member of that organization. I agree with them though. Which one of these recent shootings would've been prevented by a UBC?
curtpenn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
blackie said:

Let's look at this from a different angle. Full disclosure...I don't own a gun nor want a gun or really be around anyone who is openly carrying. That being said my son in law is a collector and owns many guns. I have no problem with that.

But can anyone name a single thing that over 90 percent or the American public want that Congress doesn't adopt within a reasonable time. My irritation is that the people in Congress that do lap dances for the NRA ignore the will of their constituents and let a very small organization in relation to the population get whatever they want or prevent things they don't want. Not to mention that a not so small percentage of NRA members want UBCs.

Anyone know of anything......anything where the overwhelming desires of the American voter get completely buried?
As an NRA member, I find it hard to believe that a significant percentage of members favor UBCs. Would be interesting to see some sort of trustworthy data on that. I just think it's sad so many Americans are so ill informed and/or weak minded as to give assent to something so ineffective and potentially dangerous to our republic. Guess this is the natural consequence when so many of our institutions and media are so left wing.
YoakDaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
curtpenn said:

blackie said:

Let's look at this from a different angle. Full disclosure...I don't own a gun nor want a gun or really be around anyone who is openly carrying. That being said my son in law is a collector and owns many guns. I have no problem with that.

But can anyone name a single thing that over 90 percent or the American public want that Congress doesn't adopt within a reasonable time. My irritation is that the people in Congress that do lap dances for the NRA ignore the will of their constituents and let a very small organization in relation to the population get whatever they want or prevent things they don't want. Not to mention that a not so small percentage of NRA members want UBCs.

Anyone know of anything......anything where the overwhelming desires of the American voter get completely buried?
As an NRA member, I find it hard to believe that a significant percentage of members favor UBCs. Would be interesting to see some sort of trustworthy data on that. I just think it's sad so many Americans are so ill informed and/or weak minded as to give assent to something so ineffective and potentially dangerous to our republic. Guess this is the natural consequence when so many of our institutions and media are so left wing.


Just remember that polls had Hillary winning, too.
YoakDaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cinque said:

YoakDaddy said:

Jinx 2 said:

They were never on the table.

Yes they were and LaPierre was for a UBC until he heard from his constituency.
Nope:

Most Americans in a new poll support stricter gun regulations, with even a majority of National Rifle Association in the survey backing stiffer background checks.
Sixty-nine percent of NRA members expressed support for comprehensive background checks. A proposal to implement universal background checks would apply to all gun sales, rather than just purchases made at licensed retailers, according to the Giffords Law Center, a gun control advocacy group.
To continue reading this article, you must be a Bloomberg News subscriber.
Try 3 months for $6. Cancel anytime.
View Offers

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-tells-nras-wayne-lapierre-universal-background-checks-off-the-table-report

"The president has not mentioned supporting universal background checks. Meaningful background checks remain on the table," this official added.

LaPierre has been on the record, albeit some years ago, as being for UBCs but stressed that current laws need to be enforced.
Iron Claw
How long do you want to ignore this user?
blackie said:

YoakDaddy said:

Jinx 2 said:

They were never on the table.

Yes they were and LaPierre was for a UBC until he heard from his constituency.
His constituency should not be able to overrule the wishes of 90+% of the American people. Is your definition of democratic rule that ten percent, if that, should outweigh the ninety percent?...


It happened when a smaller percentage overruled the vast majority when it came to bathroom laws being passed allowing anyone to use any bathroom they wanted. Do you think a vast majority were in favor of that?
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
blackie said:

Let's look at this from a different angle. Full disclosure...I don't own a gun nor want a gun or really be around anyone who is openly carrying. That being said my son in law is a collector and owns many guns. I have no problem with that.

But can anyone name a single thing that over 90 percent or the American public want that Congress doesn't adopt within a reasonable time. My irritation is that the people in Congress that do lap dances for the NRA ignore the will of their constituents and let a very small organization in relation to the population get whatever they want or prevent things they don't want. Not to mention that a not so small percentage of NRA members want UBCs.

Anyone know of anything......anything where the overwhelming desires of the American voter get completely buried?
Your concept of what the majority is, is unbelievably incorrect.

xiledinok
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's about 75 percent wanting it to happen and another 15 percent know it should happen but do not want the government dictating firearms.

Constitutional carry prevents the government picking and choosing whose gun to take by using judges to strip rights.


william
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

blackie said:

Let's look at this from a different angle. Full disclosure...I don't own a gun nor want a gun or really be around anyone who is openly carrying. That being said my son in law is a collector and owns many guns. I have no problem with that.

But can anyone name a single thing that over 90 percent or the American public want that Congress doesn't adopt within a reasonable time. My irritation is that the people in Congress that do lap dances for the NRA ignore the will of their constituents and let a very small organization in relation to the population get whatever they want or prevent things they don't want. Not to mention that a not so small percentage of NRA members want UBCs.

Anyone know of anything......anything where the overwhelming desires of the American voter get completely buried?
About 3/4 of Americans think flag-burning should be illegal, but it's constitutionally protected. Majority rule wasn't the intention of the Founders.
also sprach learned handy.

Dale?
YoakDaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

blackie said:

Let's look at this from a different angle. Full disclosure...I don't own a gun nor want a gun or really be around anyone who is openly carrying. That being said my son in law is a collector and owns many guns. I have no problem with that.

But can anyone name a single thing that over 90 percent or the American public want that Congress doesn't adopt within a reasonable time. My irritation is that the people in Congress that do lap dances for the NRA ignore the will of their constituents and let a very small organization in relation to the population get whatever they want or prevent things they don't want. Not to mention that a not so small percentage of NRA members want UBCs.

Anyone know of anything......anything where the overwhelming desires of the American voter get completely buried?
About 3/4 of Americans think flag-burning should be illegal, but it's constitutionally protected. Majority rule wasn't the intention of the Founders.

"shall not be infringed" was also specifically intended by our Framers because it restricts government. The technology is irrelevant.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.