Top Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Does any one think an expanded background check is a good thing? A check on a individual is one thing, but when the firearm inf

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Does any one think an expanded background check is a good thing? A check on a individual is one thing, but when the firearm inf

    Does any one think an expanded background check is a good thing? A check on a individual is one thing, but when the firearm information is added to the check(make,model,serial #), does that not become gun registration?? We all know, or should know what gun registration leads to.

  • #2
    That is exactly what this is all about, backdoor gun registration as a prelude to confiscation if we are to learn anything from history. The background check, universal or otherwise, is useless in curbing the violence that prompted this discussion because information about the mental health of the applicant is still unknown to the civil servant at the other end of the phone line doing the checking. Until mental health providers are mandated to report potentially violent nutters to the feds and a data base is created for this purpose, all the background checks in the world will not keep guns out of the hands of the nuts that are killing kids and movie patrons. The only constant common denominator in all these mass murders/attacks is the fact that the perpetrator was a mental case, and in most of the cases a known nut case.

    Comment


    • #3
      The only thing that I see and I strongly advocate is getting mental records on the background information. All of the mass killing have been by mental cases. Of course at least one comes back to irresponsible parenting also which we can't do anything about and is esscalating in this country everyday.

      Comment


      • #4
        Let's back up a step.

        First. "Doctor patient confidentiality."
        Second. HIPPA - A FEDERAL law that is "supposed" to protect a patient's medical information from becoming "public" knowledge. (Some say the fine print does quite the opposite!)
        While I fully understand the connection between "gun ownership/mental health", I also understand "Nat'l data base/mental health records".
        Guys, I fully understand your desire to make mental health a requirement for gun ownership, what I can't comprehend is ANY kind of "Data Base" established and maintained by "U.S. GOVERNMENT"!
        What's to keep some "gun grabber", at some point, from deciding a "gun nut" (yeah! lots of us here fit THAT category!) also needs to be on that "Mentally Unstable" list?
        I still say, "Give 'em nuthin'!"!
        The "last" thing our Gov't needs is any excuse to maintain ANY kind of "database"!!

        Comment


        • #5
          Bravo Sarge!

          You guys should read Manchin and Tomey's bill, no governmental registration...as a matter of fact there's pretty stiff penalties incurred for attempting to do so.

          Comment


          • #6
            Like that would stop Holder and his crowd from doing something illegal or unconstitutional......

            Comment


            • #7
              An "expanded background check" is simply another of those "reasonable compromises" that allows the guver'nment python to squeeze law abiding gun owners a little more. Look at who they want to background check; military veterans are high on the list, as are Christians, anyone disagreeing with guver'nment policies/actions, and LAWFUL GUN OWNERS!
              I say that to be reasonable, the gun grabbers should show some good faith by first prosecuting Eric Holder for gunrunning. Then show a bit more good faith, by cleaning up Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York City. Prosecute Bloomberg for his illegal stings and "straw man" purchases by his minions.
              Then, if they want a "reasonable compromise", we will hammer out a law that allows anyone able to pass a background check be allowed to own anything he or she or they can afford.
              PS- my apologies to all self respecting pythons everywhere for my analogy, it seemed to fit, even though I borrowed it from Petzal.

              Comment


              • #8
                Yer absolutely kee-rect '06!
                I can feel that snake tensing up with every "reasonable" law!
                Of the 15,000+ refused firearms in 2012 for "failing" the current NICS system, the Justice Dept "prosecuted" (did NOT say convicted!) an astounding FORTY-FOUR (44)!!!!

                "GIVE 'EM NUTHIN'!"

                They got laws out the wahzoo now they don't use! ...and they want MORE laws?
                Another law won't help anything but the "paper & ink" concessionaire!

                Comment


                • #9
                  When the background check requirement for dealers was enacted, it exempted private transfers of firearms, or it would not have passed.
                  Now the gun grabbers want to "expand" it for transfers between NON-dealers, pretending that it was an oversight, and calling it a loophole they need to close for gun show transfers. They are willing to exempt transfers between family and and friends (for now) in order to get it passed.
                  Soon they will be back for that, calling it another loophole.
                  This is like being nibbled to death by ducks.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I don't think that any of the Mexican drug cartel members that Attorney General Holder shipped guns to would have been able to pass the same background check his boss wants to impose on the law abiding American people.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      If they wanna stop illegal gun sales, throwing Eric Holder in jail would be a good start. Do they really think criminals get their guns legally? I doubt that. I believe the idiots in Washington actually know what they're doing. They are going for total confiscation for a little false security. Hopefully us gun owners won't put up with this!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The only registration I am in favor of is removing the type, model, serial number, caliber or gauge, and manufacture of the firearm from the call for firearms buying approval. Just for your information, I worked for Manchin and don't trust him as far as I can throw him.

                        Comment

                        Welcome!

                        Collapse

                        Welcome to Field and Streams's Answers section. Here you will find hunting, fishing, and survival tips from the editors of Field and Stream, as well as recommendations from readers like yourself.

                        If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ for information on posting and navigating the forums.

                        And don't forget to check out the latest reviews on guns and outdoor gear on fieldandstream.com.

                        Right Rail 1

                        Collapse

                        Top Active Users

                        Collapse

                        There are no top active users.

                        Right Rail 2

                        Collapse

                        Latest Topics

                        Collapse

                        Right Rail 3

                        Collapse

                        Footer Ad

                        Collapse
                        Working...
                        X