US Senate rejects universal (expanded) background checks - Polidicks

it isn't like background checks don't happen.

I find it humorous from Kopimi discussing those unlawfully using their firearms, etc, when he openly admitted on here he walked into a gun store and FFL dealer and walked out without doing a 4473 form. Which he is required by law to fill out and the store is required by law to have him fill out. Thus, admitting himself he is a criminal with a firearm and has committed a firearm offense. He's still on here ranting and raving so he has failed to turn himself in to the authorities as well as turning the FFL in for violating the law as well. Then he talks down about law abiding people with firearms, when he, himself, is a criminal that has committed a firearms offense - which he is so afraid of to happen. So, is this another do as I say but not as I do type of person? I'd say so.

[QUOTE=Aman VII;40318786]There is no "loophole". Calling private sales a loophole was just made up by gun grabbing democrats.[/QUOTE] Gun confiscation has never been a part of the Democrat's platform. [QUOTE=NicoleEmilid;40318818]Where is he getting this 90 percent from?[/QUOTE] Three different polls [url]http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/04/poll-obama-guns-background-checks.php[/url] [url]http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-34222_162-57564386-10391739/9-in-10-back-universal-gun-background-checks/[/url] [url]http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/apr/02/mark-kelly/mark-kelly-says-94-percent-floridians-support-univ/[/url] [url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/17/gun-poll_n_2494513.html[/url] [editline]18th April 2013[/editline] Wow I didn't realize this was a 7 page thread, if these points were already covered then sorry, but it's p funny to see how far-right FP is when it comes to guns.

[QUOTE=HkSniper;40323013]I find it humorous from Kopimi discussing those unlawfully using their firearms, etc, when he openly admitted on here he walked into a gun store and FFL dealer and walked out without doing a 4473 form. Which he is required by law to fill out and the store is required by law to have him fill out. Thus, admitting himself he is a criminal with a firearm and has committed a firearm offense. He's still on here ranting and raving so he has failed to turn himself in to the authorities as well as turning the FFL in for violating the law as well. Then he talks down about law abiding people with firearms, when he, himself, is a criminal that has committed a firearms offense - which he is so afraid of to happen. So, is this another do as I say but not as I do type of person? I'd say so.[/QUOTE] It's the gunshop who would be at fault if they didn't perform a background check. That's like saying the cashier at my grocery store is a thief because I forgot to take my change.

This good news. Also, universal background checks are dumb ass hell cause there's no way it could ever be implement. Hypothetically, I have a gun and will not register it. My neighbor is interested in my gun, so I sell it to him from my kitchen and he takes it over to his house. Law enforcement would never ever know unless they just blatantly invade your privacy.

[QUOTE=DevinWatson;40318071]I just wish the panic would die down so I can buy some ammo, I just want to go out plinking :([/QUOTE] I wish I had a gun...oh well I could still set of firecrackers instead.

Aw man when that guy cut Fienstien off, mmmmm the delicious tears. :dance:

[QUOTE=HkSniper;40323013]I find it humorous from Kopimi discussing those unlawfully using their firearms, etc, when he openly admitted on here he walked into a gun store and FFL dealer and walked out without doing a 4473 form. Which he is required by law to fill out and the store is required by law to have him fill out. Thus, admitting himself he is a criminal with a firearm and has committed a firearm offense. He's still on here ranting and raving so he has failed to turn himself in to the authorities as well as turning the FFL in for violating the law as well. Then he talks down about law abiding people with firearms, when he, himself, is a criminal that has committed a firearms offense - which he is so afraid of to happen. So, is this another do as I say but not as I do type of person? I'd say so.[/QUOTE] if you had read what i said, i did fill out a 4473 form, but was let out of the shop before they had filed anything and completed a background check. i didn't break any laws (as far as i'm aware?) i also explicitly stated i'd be reporting the FFL this weekend lol [editline]18th April 2013[/editline] moreover even if i had broken the law it would have been unintentional in which case how are you making this a moral argument as if i would be a bad person for unknowingly breaking a law

[QUOTE=Raidyr;40323355] Wow I didn't realize this was a 7 page thread, if these points were already covered then sorry, but it's p funny to see how far-right FP is when it comes to guns.[/QUOTE] FP doesn't fuck around when their gun collections are threatened.

This just shows how many senators are in the pockets of the NRA and the gun lobby. I see no reason not to have stronger background checks.

[QUOTE=H4wkeye;40324816]I see no reason not to have stronger background checks.[/QUOTE] Such as? Can you tell me exactly what the bill proposed that would help prevent crime?

[QUOTE]a proposal to ban rapid-firing "assault" weapons like the one used in Connecticut[/QUOTE] Sigh.

The fact that the Senate failed on background checks really shows the extent to which the AWB and smaller clips will not happen any time soon. Rejoice, gun toting second amendment Facepunchers! Your guns are safe.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;40323355]Gun confiscation has never been a part of the Democrat's platform. Three different polls [url]http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/04/poll-obama-guns-background-checks.php[/url] [url]http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-34222_162-57564386-10391739/9-in-10-back-universal-gun-background-checks/[/url] [url]http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/apr/02/mark-kelly/mark-kelly-says-94-percent-floridians-support-univ/[/url] [url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/17/gun-poll_n_2494513.html[/url] [editline]18th April 2013[/editline] Wow I didn't realize this was a 7 page thread, if these points were already covered then sorry, but it's p funny to see how far-right FP is when it comes to guns.[/QUOTE] So now 1,110 people is a majority of Americans, while the 4 million members of the NRA are a minority? [editline]18th April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Kopimi;40323552]if you had read what i said, i did fill out a 4473 form, but was let out of the shop before they had filed anything and completed a background check. i didn't break any laws (as far as i'm aware?) i also explicitly stated i'd be reporting the FFL this weekend lol [editline]18th April 2013[/editline] moreover even if i had broken the law it would have been unintentional in which case how are you making this a moral argument as if i would be a bad person for unknowingly breaking a law[/QUOTE] So what did you buy, Kopimi?

We could do with more background checks for people wanting to purchase weaponries. It may not help most of the time But it's better than nothing. Edit: Just to make it clear, banning weapons/ammunition shit is not the way to go.

[QUOTE=Ridge;40325873]So now 1,110 people is a majority of Americans, while the 4 million members of the NRA are a minority? [/QUOTE] It's called polling. It's unrealistic to ask every American to sign a survey asking what they think about background checks so you poll a sample size and calculate a margin of error. For the record though, most NRA members support universal background checks according to two recent polls; the Luntz Global poll in 2012 showing 74% support along with a January 2013 poll by the New England Journal of Medicine.

[QUOTE=Ridge;40325873]So now 1,110 people is a majority of Americans, while the 4 million members of the NRA are a minority? [/QUOTE] And now we get the statistics deniers.

Going back to general population though, there are two more polls showing overwelming support with Pew's January 2013 survey sitting at 85% and a Fox News survey at 91% of respondents favoring universal criminal background checks. Even if you throw out Fox and Luntz that's still three different respected polling institutes giving the same ballpark results: The vast majority, 85% minimum, of surveyed Americans support universal background checks.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;40322994]why is it necessary? wouldn't it be redundant?[/QUOTE] It would not be redundant to empower an already active policy. It would just be more of it.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;40323552]if you had read what i said, i did fill out a 4473 form, but was let out of the shop before they had filed anything and completed a background check. i didn't break any laws (as far as i'm aware?) i also explicitly stated i'd be reporting the FFL this weekend lol [editline]18th April 2013[/editline] moreover even if i had broken the law it would have been unintentional in which case how are you making this a moral argument as if i would be a bad person for unknowingly breaking a law[/QUOTE] Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Also, you did not say you filled out the 4473. You said you wrote down your name on a piece of paper and walked out. Nice try at back peddling, though. You either are illegally in possession of that firearm or you simply never have purchased a gun in your life and are full of shit.

It's like ice cream. It's great and if you get more, it is not redundant ice cream, it is just more deliciousness.

[QUOTE=person11;40325828]The fact that the Senate failed on background checks really shows the extent to which the AWB and smaller clips will not happen any time soon. Rejoice, gun toting second amendment Facepunchers! Your guns are safe.[/QUOTE] The law they were trying to push was specifically watered down by Democrats and almost immediately backed by Obama and it [I]still [/I]didn't pass through the senate. Harry Reid himself shot down his own party's AWB and magazine size restrictions. I called this shit days ago in the Newtown weekly address thread when all the gun nuts were going on about how it was an emotional ploy by Obama to take yer guns. Even people in this thread seem to think the government wants to confiscate firearms.

[QUOTE=person11;40325828]The fact that the Senate failed on background checks really shows the extent to which the AWB and smaller clips will not happen any time soon.[/QUOTE] And they shouldn't. Background checks would be next to impossible to enforce for private sales, and we already have checks in place for purchasing from vendors. In the past, an AWB and restricted magazines have proven to be woefully ineffective against crime and mass shootings. Why should it be different now? Because twenty six people died in Connecticut? Honestly this entire thing is disgusting. All these ads with the victims' faces plastered all over them calling to shame the US Senate, Obama strutting around making speeches with the families of the victims in attendance, the majority of the American public being ready and willing to take whatever is being shoved down their throats, and people like Piers Morgan standing on the graves of those victims to further his own political viewpoint and spread blatant misinformation to people who don't know any better... who, exactly, should be ashamed?

The victims are being included voluntarily. It is not shameful. It's not like Obama is forcing them to appear with him. They want to. Anyway, I am sure that Obama thinks that these measures will help. You can accuse him of being wrong, but accusing him of ruthlessly using families of victims for political aims is heartless and calling him heartless. [editline]18th April 2013[/editline] And I agree that a AWB and smaller clip sizes would not do much in this country, but still, even though it is definitely difficult, expanded background checks could only bring good, even if it is at a cost to the government, and even if it is difficult to enforce 100%.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;40323355]Gun confiscation has never been a part of the Democrat's platform. Three different polls [url]http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/04/poll-obama-guns-background-checks.php[/url] [url]http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-34222_162-57564386-10391739/9-in-10-back-universal-gun-background-checks/[/url] [url]http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/apr/02/mark-kelly/mark-kelly-says-94-percent-floridians-support-univ/[/url] [url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/17/gun-poll_n_2494513.html[/url] [editline]18th April 2013[/editline] Wow I didn't realize this was a 7 page thread, if these points were already covered then sorry, but it's p funny to see how far-right FP is when it comes to guns.[/QUOTE] It's actually only 1 poll from a specific university and it was only done in 3 states. 2 being overly democrat. At least that is the one that Biden and Obama were constantly parroting. (90%!!! think of the 90%!) Also the sample size if you read into it is ridiculously small, like ~1000 people at most. I would never go off that poll and say "90% of all Americans want X". Yes I know, surveys, statistics, etc. I still think it's bullshit and I wouldn't base what a country wants off of 1000 people picked randomly. Thankfully all of the gun control is killed (for now) so murrica and is safe.

[QUOTE=massn7;40327635]And they shouldn't. Background checks would be next to impossible to enforce for private sales, and we already have checks in place for purchasing from vendors. In the past, an AWB and restricted magazines have proven to be woefully ineffective against crime and mass shootings. Why should it be different now? Because twenty six people died in Connecticut? Honestly this entire thing is disgusting. All these ads with the victims' faces plastered all over them calling to shame the US Senate, Obama strutting around making speeches with the families of the victims in attendance, the majority of the American public being ready and willing to take whatever is being shoved down their throats, and people like Piers Morgan standing on the graves of those victims to further his own political viewpoint and spread blatant misinformation to people who don't know any better... who, exactly, should be ashamed?[/QUOTE] I'm not generally supportive of an AWB or magazine limits but universal background checks seem like a pretty no-nonsense measure, as supported by their massive popular support. If you oppose background checks that's okay, I disagree entirely and it places you well on the fringe, but do you gun guys who are celebrating this have any issue with a Congress who doesn't vote along with, at minimum, 85% of it's constituents? It's hard for any policies to reach nearly that high. [editline]18th April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Aman VII;40332192]It's actually only 1 poll from a specific university and it was only done in 3 states. 2 being overly democrat. At least that is the one that Biden and Obama were constantly parroting. (90%!!! think of the 90%!)[/QUOTE] Uh, no? Between that post and my later one you have 5 different polls: Pew, Quinnipac, New York Post/CBS, Fox News, and Luntz Global. 85% is the bare minimum, and three of them give answers within the margin of error of 3%. [QUOTE] Also the sample size if you read into it is ridiculously small, like ~1000 people at most. I would never go off that poll and say "90% of all Americans want X". [/QUOTE] The margin of error is generally + or - 3%. This is well within acceptable bounds. [QUOTE]Yes I know, surveys, statistics, etc. I still think it's bullshit and I wouldn't base what a country wants off of 1000 people picked randomly. [/QUOTE] "Statistics are bullshit" Unless, of course, they lined up with your belief. If 85% of Americans opposed background checks and the Senate passed this bill, this thread would be on [I]fire [/I]and you would be citing the very same polls. [QUOTE]Thankfully all of the gun control is killed (for now) so murrica and is safe.[/QUOTE] Again, if you are on the far right fringe of American politics I suppose that there isn't much I can do in regards to reason to get through to you, but you don't find it concerning at all that we have a Congress that works against the vast majority of what it's citizens want?

[QUOTE=person11;40326089]It's like ice cream. It's great and if you get more, it is not redundant ice cream, it is just more deliciousness.[/QUOTE] policy is not ice cream though. it makes things really complex. like the department of homeland security, it does jobs that are already covered by the cia and fbi so what you get is a redundant department tying up resources doing things that are already being done.

Multiple flavors of ice cream with sauce on it

For the people who feared this bill would have lead to the creation of a registry, not only is such a thing already illegal, but this compromise would have doubled-down and made it a felony punishable by 15 years in prison if a government or law enforcement official attempted to create a registry.

[QUOTE=Kopimi;40323552]if you had read what i said, i did fill out a 4473 form, but was let out of the shop before they had filed anything and completed a background check. i didn't break any laws (as far as i'm aware?) i also explicitly stated i'd be reporting the FFL this weekend lol [editline]18th April 2013[/editline] moreover even if i had broken the law it would have been unintentional in which case how are you making this a moral argument as if i would be a bad person for unknowingly breaking a law[/QUOTE] what place did you buy from anyway