-
Hello!
Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.
Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....
Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.
Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.
My right to bear arms is under fire right now.
- Thread starter Outcast
- Start date
What am I missing here?
No one can LEGALLY buy a gun online without having the gun shipped to a FFL to be processed for the recipient, which means a background check. Or did something change that I am not aware of? As far as I know sellers will not even accept a purchase of a gun where the sale was made online without receiving a legitimate copy of the FFL holder that the gun needs to be shipped to. They will ONLY ship to the address on the FFL, and BATF actually has an online verification system that they can use to verify that the FFL copy they have received is legitimate. But I guess it was made to sound like any Tom, Dick, or Harry could just go online, click a button and buy a gun to have it shipped directly to their house. Sorry, tain't so, and never has been so as far as I am aware..... The FFL process predates the internet since this restriction concerning FFLs has been on the books since 1968.
As for gun shows, any dealers (meaning anyone who is in the business of selling guns) selling at a gun show already must do a background check on the purchaser before they can deliver that gun to the buyer.
There are private sellers at shows, which are not required to undergo background checks, but this is really no different from them offering a gun for sale and selling their personal property to someone they choose to from their home. Much like a reptile show with private individuals selling reptiles, someone can lease a table at a gun show and sell off their guns if they desire to do so. They just cannot do it as a BUSINESS, meaning buying guns with the express intent of reselling them.
From what I heard the bill was supposed to exempt private sales anyway, so what would it have actually accomplished that isn't already on the books?
Maybe there is more to this than I am seeing, but at least the anti-gunners got a well deserved slap to the chops over this. And hopefully their votes FOR this bill will be duly noted when their re-election rolls around again.
People are just getting tired of hearing this "if it saves just one child" song and dance. It's despicable that they use children's deaths and injuries to try to further their anti-gun fear and loathing agenda.
Seriously lame brains, had there been someone who had a gun and knew how to use it in those "massacre free zones" they have set up, it quite likely would have saved more than just one child.
tsst
Deuce is watching!
Nothing changed Rich. It is still just like that in Ohio too. All internet sales and dealers at shows require background check. Private sales, which as you said would have been exempt anyway, are just that a person selling their private property. IMHO the real goal was to take step one towards a registry.
Nanci
Alien Lover
Make sure to write to your US Senators and thank them for voting against this.
Make sure to write to your US Senators to tell them they suck for voting for this.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
I wrote to both Marco Rubio (XOXOXO) and Bill Nelson (YOU SUCK) this morning.
Guruofchem
New member
May get smacked for this, but...
I would love to see the 24/7 coverage of these horrific events curtailed - it serves no useful purpose besides catering to ghoulishness in the hopes of charging more for ad time, and has definite negative impacts, including glorifying the disturbed individuals who perpetrate these crimes (and inspiring others to try) and sending a message that our country is worse off than it really is. The fear-mongering for the sake of ratings has just got to stop, in my opinion, even if that means we get less information at lower frequency. The media will scream censorship, of course, but they aren't allowed to cover active battles in war zones either, and similar logic pertains - prevent disclosure of information that is potentially harmful.
Without all the coverage, the emotional angle the anti-gun crowd is playing also becomes rather less effective...bonus!
I would love to see the 24/7 coverage of these horrific events curtailed - it serves no useful purpose besides catering to ghoulishness in the hopes of charging more for ad time, and has definite negative impacts, including glorifying the disturbed individuals who perpetrate these crimes (and inspiring others to try) and sending a message that our country is worse off than it really is. The fear-mongering for the sake of ratings has just got to stop, in my opinion, even if that means we get less information at lower frequency. The media will scream censorship, of course, but they aren't allowed to cover active battles in war zones either, and similar logic pertains - prevent disclosure of information that is potentially harmful.
Without all the coverage, the emotional angle the anti-gun crowd is playing also becomes rather less effective...bonus!
Outcast
ATPSS
No smacking from me. I agree. Though they would be crying out for violation of the 1st amendment, while at the same time spinning words to be used in violation of the 2nd amendment.
starsevol
Cohabbing is cruelty...
No smacking from me either. You made some wonderful points and worded them better than I could have.
Chip
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒ&
No smacking here. I would like for them to voluntarily do that, though, not through mandate. The Columbine killers were downright glorified, and spree killings have been all the rage (no pun intended) ever since.
After the Colorado movie theatre massacre, newspapers had headlines like "Inside the Joker's Lair!" showing the murderer's apartment. All I could think is, that's not going to be good for preventing copycats.
After the Colorado movie theatre massacre, newspapers had headlines like "Inside the Joker's Lair!" showing the murderer's apartment. All I could think is, that's not going to be good for preventing copycats.
Tara80
ACR Breeder # 787
I think most of us would agree with this.
The media is used to lead the sheep; used to stir up fear that a wolf is in their midst causing them to look for protection from the perceived wolves... all the while, it's the wolves that are controlling the media.
A whistle blower that left CNN (Reporter) was making a big deal a while back that CNN, along with a few other news agencies, is paid directly by the BO administration.
CaseyH
Corny, and proud of it
Nanci, thank you very much for this link. This morning I wanted to make sure I send the US Senators messages thanking them for voting against (Portman), and letting them have my opinion for voting for this bill (Brown). I think many folks feel the way we do, and our voices need to be heard! They sure don't get heard in the media.
Casey
tsst
Deuce is watching!
This^^^
I would also like to see the media held more accountable for their daily mis-reporting and conjecture.
Tara80
ACR Breeder # 787
Sometimes... no many times the all mighty dollar speaks stronger than morals.
Guruofchem
New member
You did not just use the words "morals" and "politician" in the same sentence, did you? Going to need surgery to remove the tongue from your cheek...
Guruofchem
New member
"Moral - of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical - capable of conforming to the rules of right conduct"
Right conduct presupposes some sort of societal agreement on what that conduct should look like, whether its the Golden Rule, Hammurabi's Code, or any other set of rules you prefer. Personally, I find the conduct of most politicians, especially at the federal level, to fall below the threshold of right conduct as our society has established it. "House of Representatives" may be the biggest oxymoron in the English language these days...
Right conduct presupposes some sort of societal agreement on what that conduct should look like, whether its the Golden Rule, Hammurabi's Code, or any other set of rules you prefer. Personally, I find the conduct of most politicians, especially at the federal level, to fall below the threshold of right conduct as our society has established it. "House of Representatives" may be the biggest oxymoron in the English language these days...
tsst
Deuce is watching!
The following video is soooo laughable as it his admin and Mr. Holders justice department that sent many of those guns down to Mexico.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...iolence_in_mexico_pushes_for_gun_control.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...iolence_in_mexico_pushes_for_gun_control.html