Universal Background Checks? Yes or No? Ideas?

[Cobalt 60]

Are you a liberal Democrat Obama lover? Its people like you that are willing to give up what rights we have now that give these people, liberal idiots , power and traction. NO! we do not need universal background checks, we do not need more government infringement on our 2nd amendment rights, and we do not need gun owners,such as yourself and others trying to somehow set up new obstacles for law abiding gun owners to face. No universal background check or "assault weapon" ban or magazine capacity limit would have changed anything in the Sandy Hook episode and many other shootings. An armed person on scene would have prevented most mass killings however. Take that Universal background check crap to some liberal web sites or the Obama and Finstein lovers party and getr it out of the ODT!

Don't attack the OP. He is just trying to present an argument and get the take of others on the subject. I disagree with him, but his post is certainly not that of a gun hater. Certainly not a "lberal Democrat Obama lover" in the pejorative way that term is now used.

 

[bc]

I love this post - can you send me to the source?

I don't know the original source. It was something I saw on another gun discussion forum and saved.

 

[captdave77]

Are you a liberal Democrat Obama lover? Its people like you that are willing to give up what rights we have now that give these people, liberal idiots , power and traction. NO! we do not need universal background checks, we do not need more government infringement on our 2nd amendment rights, and we do not need gun owners,such as yourself and others trying to somehow set up new obstacles for law abiding gun owners to face. No universal background check or "assault weapon" ban or magazine capacity limit would have changed anything in the Sandy Hook episode and many other shootings. An armed person on scene would have prevented most mass killings however. Take that Universal background check crap to some liberal web sites or the Obama and Finstein lovers party and getr it out of the ODT!

Is this tongue in cheek?

 

[rebel1022]

Are you a liberal Democrat Obama lover? Its people like you that are willing to give up what rights we have now that give these people, liberal idiots , power and traction. NO! we do not need universal background checks, we do not need more government infringement on our 2nd amendment rights, and we do not need gun owners,such as yourself and others trying to somehow set up new obstacles for law abiding gun owners to face. No universal background check or "assault weapon" ban or magazine capacity limit would have changed anything in the Sandy Hook episode and many other shootings. An armed person on scene would have prevented most mass killings however. Take that Universal background check crap to some liberal web sites or the Obama and Finstein lovers party and getr it out of the ODT!

I'm not a Liberal or an Obama supporter in fact I find it hard to tolerate either of them. Only thing worse is someone like you that bashes someone for sharing their opinion and asking the opinions of the other members on an issue I believe we will all need to face. I do not believe in a gun registry or in an assault weapons ban or in limiting magazine capacities. I thought this was clear in my post or at least I tried my best to make it as clear as possible. I do not want to see any restrictions on firearms or our rights to carry, buy trade or sell them. You obviously misunderstood me. I am asking for an opinion from members on the creation of a website for private gun owners to be able to know who they are selling a firearm to. That was all.

 

[rebel1022]

Don't attack the OP. He is just trying to present an argument and get the take of others on the subject. I disagree with him, but his post is certainly not that of a gun hater. Certainly not a "lberal Democrat Obama lover" in the pejorative way that term is now used.

thank you

 

[rebel1022]

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945,13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million 'educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated."

Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.

The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, ask them "Who Do YOU want to round up and exterminate?"

With guns, we are citizens.
Without them, we are subjects.

This is why I don't want to see an assault weapons ban. They all want to know why we would need assault weapons when they're only good to kill. They're right they are extremely good at that, and they are also extremely good at protecting not only you and your family but other people not as well equipped. If society were to fail the only person you can rely on to protect you is you!

 

[rebel1022]

Here is a link on one of the judicial hearings on gun control watch the video it's a good one. http://personalliberty.com/2013/02/15/gun-control-fanatics-continue-biggest-gun-nanny-contest/

 

[spencer60]

I don't think there is any evidence whatsoever that casual sales are a significant source of firearms for felonious actors...

I was wrong in my previous post... the actual number of criminal guns directly traced to private sales by the NIJ study was less than 1%. The 5% was the entire 'other' catagory.

 

[captdave77]

I was wrong in my previous post... the actual number of criminal guns directly traced to private sales by the NIJ study was less than 1%. The 5% was the entire 'other' catagory.

1%?!?! We must do something!

 

[spencer60]

1%?!?! We must do something!

Yup, it's a crisis... and we know that can't be let go to waste! <grin>