your opinion background checks?

[AceGirlsHusband]

I have no problem with a background check as a prerequisite to firearm ownership... but I do not think the state or the federal government should charge for it - anymore than they can charge a tax to vote.

[nedro]

We in CA for the most part are used to these things

In my dads younger years he would be able to go into a gun shop buy what he liked and take it home right then and there

Now most of us younger buyers are used to background checks, having to go to ffl dealers for a ppt and the dreaded 10 day waiting period

As I was starting dros for my hawk982 yesterday my lgs and I spoke about it and agreed for us Californians obamas bs won't affect us one bit. We are used to this bs.

He is trying to bring California gun laws nationwide and that sucks. I know I'd be furious to live in one of the better states and this have be trust upon thee

When I was a kid, we all went to Big Basin and started shooting .22 cal rifles towards the creek. Ranger stopped (we were parked on the side of the road shooting away from the road) and informed us that were weren't supposed to shoot in a state park. So we put the guns away and drove into the main section of the park and had a fun day.
I don't think it would've gone the same way today.

[Wordupmybrotha]

We in CA for the most part are used to these things

In my dads younger years he would be able to go into a gun shop buy what he liked and take it home right then and there

Now most of us younger buyers are used to background checks, having to go to ffl dealers for a ppt and the dreaded 10 day waiting period

As I was starting dros for my hawk982 yesterday my lgs and I spoke about it and agreed for us Californians obamas bs won't affect us one bit. We are used to this bs.

He is trying to bring California gun laws nationwide and that sucks. I know I'd be furious to live in one of the better states and this have be trust upon thee

When I was a kid, we all went to Big Basin and started shooting .22 cal rifles towards the creek. Ranger stopped (we were parked on the side of the road shooting away from the road) and informed us that were weren't supposed to shoot in a state park. So we put the guns away and drove into the main section of the park and had a fun day.
I don't think it would've gone the same way today.

What the H. happened? Liberals back then were into guns too, right?

[safewaysecurity]

I'm disappointed in a lot of people in here. EVEN IF background checks would save lives ( and they don't they probably cost lives ) I would still oppose them. I hate this ridiculous notion that rights should just be infringed and restricted upon no matter what so long as there is some sort of life saving net benefit. This was a country founded on the notion that YES liberty is dangerous. But that we would rather DIE as free men than to live a long life of indentured servitude. It wasn't "Give me liberty unless that liberty even slightly increases the chance of certain negative effects and maybe infringements are ok. " No it was "Give me Liberty or Give me Death".

I personally tho have no problem if a private seller voluntary chooses to only sell their firearm if a background check is completed first. Heck I might even do that depending on the circumstance ( of course in a state where no background check is legal ). Maybe for a friend or someone who seems cool I wouldn't do one but for someone I feel a bit iffy about I either make them go through a background check or don't do the sale at all.

[major burnout]

Law abiding people should have no problems with a background check. I've had one done for every firearm I own, and 10 day wait, and multiple times for CCW and Renewal.

What is stopping you from commiting a crime tomorrow? Is it your last background check?

Pretend for 1 minute that you are a bad guy who wants to hurt someone, could you find a way to get a gun?

In theory I agree with background checks. The reality is background checks dont do squat.

[JDay]

What is stopping you from commiting a crime tomorrow? Is it your last background check?

Pretend for 1 minute that you are a bad guy who wants to hurt someone, could you find a way to get a gun?

In theory I agree with background checks. The reality is background checks dont do squat.

They work as intended. To make it harder and a hassle to purchase firearms.

[glockman19]

What is stopping you from commiting a crime tomorrow? Is it your last background check?

Pretend for 1 minute that you are a bad guy who wants to hurt someone, could you find a way to get a gun?

In theory I agree with background checks. The reality is background checks dont do squat.

What is stopping you from committing a crime tomorrow?
Nothing.

Is it your last background check?
NO

Pretend for 1 minute that you are a bad guy who wants to hurt someone, could you find a way to get a gun?
YES

[morfeeis]

Two points.

The poll has changed and is worded in such a way that you have to be very careful in casting your new vote.

Looking at the CGN poll i can see why the anti freedom side is winning, it's hard to win a war for your rights when 1/3-1/4 of those on your side are fighting against you.

[Rainbow Warrior]

Besides all the obvious reasons, a few personal experience ones:

1. Former neighbors kid - violent in school - beat up students with anything that came to hand.
Attacked a teacher.
Police were not called, - in order to "save his future"
After High School, it was not in the public records - so at 18+ he buys a gun -
shoots and cripples 2 people.

What if your child, spouse, mother was crippled?

Exhaustive Background Checks should include school records of mental or violence issues.

2. When living in Oklahoma many years ago, a young man bought a gun at a gun show (no background check).
He'd lost his job, and coming from the "wrong side of town" decided to rob a store.
2 customers and the store owner scarred for life, but still alive.

Yes, we need background checks - exhaustive ones

And, also, yes, vote for Trump - look at his great 2nd Amendment agenda:

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positio...endment-rights

How liberal of you, you must be lost the Clay Aiken fan board is down the dial a bit.

[vliberatore]

I support allowing private citizens to access the NICS system.

[model63]

I support allowing private citizens to access the NICS system.

I've thought about this as well for sellers as a matter of conscious and property rights (sellers can choose to require it if they want to remotely sell or meet in a parking lot, etc.) , but have struggled with the implementation as you might as well go to an FFL LGS. In the end it is a feel good motion.

I think better tools (encrypted technology or mission impossible self-destruct checks that the FBI, DHS etc. b-tches about to Silicon Valley that terrorist apparently use) that don't infringe too much on rights of privacy might work.

IMO The real meat and potatoes is taking the profitability out of government created black markets like our drug trade, etc.

BTW Overland Park...nice area... went there to visit Sprint for work one day...

[Bert Gamble]

So you're saying that you would support a law making solitary confinement mandatory for everyone, for safety?

Oh Lord!!

[AcmeFusionCompany]

If there were a background check that would stop violence, I would gladly support it. I am willing to make sacrifices for the greater good, but I am not willing to make sacrifices to advance this ridicules agenda.

This is how I feel as well. I actually assume that the CA system provides some value and likely prevents some amount of gun-related violence. The issue is that it can't ever be proven that it works (i.e. how many people who would have committed a violent act could not do so because of the risk of or a failed background check?).
However the checks have to be efficient, the criteria has to be explicit and there cannot be any retrospective revisiting of the criteria to penalize current gun owners.
An example is the proposed check for a mental health condition. What exactly is the criteria for that? Mental health issues are typically non-quantifiable. Do individuals get blocked at the whim of the government?
Or the proposed 'you need a license to sell guns if you are deemed a gun dealer'. What is a gun dealer? Someone who sells two guns per year? Kamela says as few as one depending on other (undefined) criteria. Is it at the whim of the government?
It's like saying you'll get a speeding ticket if you're 'driving too fast'. Um huh?
A

[AcmeFusionCompany]

If there were a background check that would stop violence, I would gladly support it. I am willing to make sacrifices for the greater good, but I am not willing to make sacrifices to advance this ridicules agenda.

This is how I feel as well. I actually assume that the CA system provides some value and likely prevents some amount of gun-related violence. The issue is that it can't ever be proven that it works (i.e. how many people who would have committed a violent act could not do so because of the risk of or a failed background check?). Since it can't be proven to work, the default behavior is to keep tightening the criteria until it is proven, which becomes a viscous cycle.
Notwithstanding that concern, the checks have to be efficient, the criteria has to be explicit and there cannot be any retrospective revisiting of the criteria to penalize current gun owners.
An example is the proposed check for a mental health condition. What exactly is the criteria for that? Mental health issues are typically non-quantifiable. Do individuals get blocked at the whim of the government?
Or the proposed 'you need a license to sell guns if you are deemed a gun dealer'. What is a gun dealer? Someone who sells two guns per year? Kamela says as few as one depending on other (undefined) criteria. Is it at the whim of the government?
It's like saying you'll get a speeding ticket if you're 'driving too fast'. Um huh?
A

[Joseph Lee]

Two points.

The poll has changed and is worded in such a way that you have to be very careful in casting your new vote.

Looking at the CGN poll i can see why the anti freedom side is winning, it's hard to win a war for your rights when 1/3-1/4 of those on your side are fighting against you.

Frustrating, huh? I really don't think it's going to get better here in my lifetime.