I would like to have a intelligent discussion about the horrible shooting that occurred today in Boulder, Co. No politics allowed.
- Thread starter Freddie.B.Cocky
- Start date
- Status
You sound like you've never seen the misuses of the USA PATRIOT act and other complete and utter oversteps by a government constantly seeking to take power from the people it governs. They don't govern for us, they govern to keep us fighting with each other that there isn't an armed rebellion so the fat cats can continue to feed each other at the top. The first things that need to happen in this country is term limits and the removal of lobbying. Neither will ever happen as long as the people who benefit from it are the ones who have to decide to end it.
Right, because I can't think of any examples of government abuse of citizens over the years.
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
If memory serves, he was allowed the purchase because the 3 days passed even though a definite answer had not been received from the FBI as it was over the weekend. I believe the FBI had questions about his outstanding charges, were having trouble figuring out which jurisdiction they were in, and were not able to get an answer before the weekend. Since the 3rd day occurred over the weekend, he was allowed to complete the purchase of the gun. The rest is very sad history for SC.
I remember it coming up at trial.
If you buy a gun from a dealer at a gun show, you go through the same process of a background check as if you bought it from a gun store or a pawn shop. I am not talking about buying from an individual at a gun show or anywhere else. So what is the "gun show loophole" people speak of?
Also, some people think/have been told that you can magically order a gun off the internet and get it shipped to your house. This is not true. If it happens, then there is already a law against it and more laws will not help. You can buy a gun from a gun dealer on the internet but it must be shipped to an FFL holder who will do the paperwork/background check before transferring the ownership to the buyer.
Also, some people think/have been told that you can magically order a gun off the internet and get it shipped to your house. This is not true. If it happens, then there is already a law against it and more laws will not help. You can buy a gun from a gun dealer on the internet but it must be shipped to an FFL holder who will do the paperwork/background check before transferring the ownership to the buyer.
When I read the subject line I thought it was about bad shooting day at a basketball tournament.
Steps to guarantee that a forum post turns political:
1. State "no politics allowed."
1. State "no politics allowed."
Any past criminal history should disqualify is my view on that, including being behind on such things as child support etc. I always figured that is what background checks were for but I agree with you there shouldn't be any loop holes.
One thing I think we could do better is with the individual to individual gun sales.
Currently if I choose to sell a gun to someone, I have to "take their word" that they can legally buy it from me. I think there should be a way to meet, maybe at the county sheriff's office, and have a regular background check performed for a minimal cost. This would eliminate honest citizens selling a gun to a person that should not have it.
I do think that is an area where we could do better as gun owners. Some gun owners are staunchly against this idea but to me it makes sense and I am pro Second Amendment.
For the record, I do a Bill of Sale and document the gun's serial number, my address and CWP number, and the buyer's address (from driver's license) and their CWP number if they have one. I keep this and give the buyer a copy if they want one.
Currently if I choose to sell a gun to someone, I have to "take their word" that they can legally buy it from me. I think there should be a way to meet, maybe at the county sheriff's office, and have a regular background check performed for a minimal cost. This would eliminate honest citizens selling a gun to a person that should not have it.
I do think that is an area where we could do better as gun owners. Some gun owners are staunchly against this idea but to me it makes sense and I am pro Second Amendment.
For the record, I do a Bill of Sale and document the gun's serial number, my address and CWP number, and the buyer's address (from driver's license) and their CWP number if they have one. I keep this and give the buyer a copy if they want one.
Last edited:
In service I qualified on an M-16 and my MOS was automatic weapons. I always considered the AR-15 to be the semi-automatic version of the M-16 assault rife. Both weapons chamber the same round. The M-16 is designed to kill people as fast as possible but in most circumstances full auto is less effective. On full auto it's difficult to hit anything at any distance. I'm fine with deer rifles as they have a clear purpose but don't see the need for assault rifles. They would not be a good choice for home defense in cramped quarters so I hope the ban is reinstated. Most law enforcement agencies support the ban on assault rifles as officers are often outgunned. Flame away.
Last edited:
The supposed "gun show loophole" is that some states do not require a private seller to private buyer at a gun show to do a background check. But this is the same as selling a gun to someone anywhere else. FFL dealers have to do background checks. Thus, there's no actual "gun show" loophole. It's the private sale loophole. Personally, I don't think the government needs to know what guns are owned by whom. They live behind walls and gates with 24 hr. security. Guns protect them, but we aren't good enough to warrant security?
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
I'm a bit torn on that, especially when it comes to barring non-violent felon from gun ownership. Given some of the non-violent crimes/charges (mainly financial crimes) that are considered felonies by somewhat antiquated SC Law, I feel a closer look at the felony prohibition should be taken.
Being behind on child support would be something to be handled on a case by case basis, IMO.
Not everyone who gets a booth at a gun show is a “licensed dealer”. Yes the people who are have to do background checks but “collectors” at the next booth over don’t have to do the same.
Well, you could do what I did and ask to see their concealed carry permit or at least their driver's license. Write their name and city down in case that gun turns up at a crime and you're good to go. You can get all that info before you meet. If you suspect they're shady ask them to meet you at a gun store or a place the police have designated for this purpose. They won't show up if they're crooks.
So you'd take a person's right to a firearm away because that person was once behind on child support? That sounds pretty extreme to me.
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
And if they show you a fake ID? There is lies the problem, and why meeting somewhere like a sheriff's dept for a quick background check shouldn't be an issue for a responsible gun owner/potential gun owner. At that point it becomes more about protecting yourself and your rights.
Yes. And the cost for the check? build it into the price of the weapon.
It's pretty hard to fake IDs nowadays. Hell, take their picture. I took a guy's tag number down.
Hitler thought the same thing. Again, be careful what you wish for. Freedom will die if you get your wish.
By law, I cannot set up at a gun show as a collector and sell firearms. Your statement involves people doing something illegal meaning there are laws already against that. Talk about a quick way to get arrested.
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
It is, and would need to be addressed on a case by case basis.
check my edited post...I do document any sales I do with driver's license information and CWP if they have one.
Serious, legal gun owners have the CWP. It's your semi-permanent background check in SC.
That may depend on where people live. There are lots of places where these events take place and the people who would be doing the arresting are actively participating with the activities.
The NRA has been successful at two things:
1) Raising money
2) Convincing people to work around gun laws to avoid a “registry”
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
Not like you think.
As to the tag - if it's stolen?
IMO, you're risking YOUR rights by putting an awful lot of trust is a person you don't know just to make a few bucks.
Me - if they can't go to the sheriff's dept and pass a simple background check (if that were the requirement), they don't need to buy my gun. It's just not worth the risk.
Again, all this discussion assumes such laws were to be passed in the future for individual to individual gun sales, but is moot with today's laws.
"Addressing mental health" is such a vague suggestion. It would, of course, require public funding too, which is a non-starter for many. It's a lot of things. We have a lot of lonely people. I still have no idea why someone would need an assault rifle. There is no one solution, but someone should not be able to easily get their hands on an assault rifle when he or she is having a rough day. It is lunacy. Most Americans support reasonable "gun control" measures. Of course, that does not matter when it comes down to it.
I like the Chris Rock approach. In one of his stand up routines he said bullets should cost $5,000 a piece. If bullets costed $5,000 a piece people would think a LOT harder about killing someone. "I mean... is it really THAT serious that I need to invest $20,000 into this situation?!?". If a bullet cost $5,000 then there would be a lot less shootings... probably a lot more stabbings, but I like my odds in a knife fight.
USCBatgirl21
Well-Known Member
So you're saying you don't think both sides use the gun debate for their own agenda.Yea...those horrible liberals....
Bless your heart.
And SOME people wonder why SOME of us HATE the political BULL SH_T that so ignorantly runs our actual GOVERNMENT(S)!!
True...IMO the gun laws need to be overhauled. Owning a gun is a privilege not a right...there is more checks for getting a DL then owning a gun. I'm so confused why people are so against better background checks. Just sad that shootings like this just doesn't effect some of these law makers.
Yeah well by NO MEANS are all the police righteous saints.
There. Just venting. =;-p
“Shall not infringe”
As to odds in a knife fight, those are very low for untrained individuals. Even with lots of training you will most likely get cut, you just have better odds of where you get cut.
If that's true, then so is the constitution as a whole.
Some us will most certainly fight you for it.
It’s a bit ironic people claim gun owners are responsible then those same people argue against responsible gun ownership laws.
We are at the point where open carry weapon permits will make a difference. If someone exchanges gunfire with this freak then there will be lives saved until the police can arrive and stop the threat. BWT, the publicity given to the Atlanta killer may have prompted this copycat tragedy.
Last edited:
- Status
