doublegunshop.com - home Forums Back Ground Checks on private gun sales

Europeans lack many of the rights and Protections we have here in the USA.

They for example..don't have a Bill of rights....every right they have can essentially be signed away with a single act of parliament.

We DO have a Bill of Rights....and they can not be taken away by any president..or any law passed by the Congress.

They can only be added or taken away by a super majority of the States.

And as I said...its not unprecedented because no other nation in the world enjoys that protection from their governments.

Exactly ! Those are God Given rights,not Government given and they can not be taken away by the government.

Posted this on the big boy area,Dan Bongino,US Secret Service

"We live in a society of wolves,you do not fight back by creating more sheep"

King, interesting stuff. I know, I know, the grass is always greener over in europe. When you penned that letter to the maverick, were you thinking 'there'll be compromise anyway' meant you guys should model after europe.

I get entertained by the flowery adjectives that are assumed to be fact, but not trying to be contrary, just interesting stuff to me.

It is written, for sure. Where are these described rights and protections observed and maintained within the Patriot Act? Is the Patriot Act subordinate to the First and Second? Did Congress sign away Bill of Rights sacred guarantees with the Patriot Act? It's one thing or the other: rights were signed away by Congress or they weren't. If they weren't, when did Washington stop rooting through everyone's private affairs: what you say, what you read, what you buy, state of your health, your financial affairs etc?

Craig, we're colonials who've done well on our side of the ocean. Nancy and I envy no one, admire many aspects of European culture and try to get over every year. We don't go for greener spaces. We have more of that here!

I don't know who's the maverick you mention but I think my reference to "compromise anyway" is that our side of the gun control debate won't get out unscathed. None in fierce struggles with governments ever does.

It appears to me now as then that there's only so much that's doable, as they say, with the governing party's legislative reach. It pales by comparison with the afflictions of the Patriot Act (to get back to my original question).

As with the current hysterical rush toward diminishing the Second Amendment, the Patriot Act was quickly proposed and passed with minimal debate and maximal emotion. Even still, there was and remains a great deal of controversy and disagreement over it. But to answer why there is less protest about the Patriot Act, you only have to look at the numbers of affected persons. The Patriot Act certainly has the potential to infringe upon various Constitutional Rights, but most Americans who don't wear turbans or worship in mosques don't see any clear and present danger to their own personal freedoms or any real intrusion into their lives. So far. For most of us, the biggest deal is the fact that we have to arrive at airports earlier and undergo a more thorough security check before boarding a plane. We shrug and say that if the FBI wishes to waste time looking into our library book choices, we have nothing to hide or nothing to fear. We understand that there are countries where there is way less personal freedom in the name of perceived security. Still, a lot of us are concerned that, in the name of political correctness, the rights of the many had to be infringed to contain the bad actions of a very few. I was very pissed when I watched my elderly parents and my 8 year old daughter go through a very rigorous search at an airport shortly after 9-11, while an obviously Arabic family in robes and turbans with enough luggage to outfit a caravan whizzed right through boarding.

To me, if the government feels it absolutely feels it needs to infringe upon someones rights, they probably should narrow it down to the group that is actually causing the problem. Similarly, most of the violent crime and murder that goes on in our cities is perpetrated by a certain ethnic group of a certain sex and a certain age range. Yet Obama and crew are centering their crosshairs on law abiding citizens who are not, and never have been the problem. If you gave most of us here a choice between Obama's Gun/Magazine Ban/Universal Registration scheme, and rounding up all gangbangers and summarily deporting them, I think you know which we'd choose. And I think you know which choice would have the most positive effect on reducing gun violence. There is more protest about the current proposals simply because we know it will have a more direct effect on more of us, and we've spent decades actually seeing the toll gun control has taken on gunowners around the world without tangible net benefits.

But certainly, you already knew that.

Well HJ will get his wish-including registration in the senate,we all need to call the RINO's .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/s...3d_story_1.html


"A bipartisan group of senators is on the verge of a deal that would expand background checks to all private firearms sales with limited exemptions, but significant disagreements remain on the issue of keeping records of private gun sales, according to aides familiar with the talks."

Democrats say that keeping records of private sales is necessary to enforce any new law and because current federal law requires licensed firearm dealers to keep records. Records of private sales also would help law enforcement trace back the history of a gun used in a crime, according to Democratic aides

Senators are considering whether to establish a new online portal where buyers and sellers could conduct the background check or to allow federally licensed gun retailers like Wal-Mart or Dick�s Sporting Goods to charge a small fee to conduct background checks for private dealers, aides said. A record of the sale then could be turned over to a licensed retailer, sent to the gun�s manufacturer or kept by the seller.

the power to tax is the power to destroy...ie obamacare...

when we have universal backgrouond checks, we will also have federal firearms transfer taxes?

Hell why stop there...

The Obama zombies will slap a $5,000 a year tax on each gun after forcing 100% registration.

Then claim they aren't disarming anyone....then they claim all they have to do is pay their taxes and they can keep their guns. Knowing most people could not afford it.

I believe Dr. Bob gave an example of Hawaii's 100% registration requirement and the estimates that compliance was some small fraction of that. Maybe a good model to look at because of the geographic isolation. The only reason would be to criminalize regular folks. How about a spot check at a local range, shooting grandpa's old gun on loan, felony?

I saw an article on cigar taxes. I believe it said 53% tax with some localities much higher. Also, regulations for use are extremely prohibitive. Only difference I can see is cigars are consumable and don't lend themselves to future regulating and fees once a sale is completed.

The grabbers know joe average gun owner is safe and responsible with their use and transfer of any firearms, but they are identifiable and controllable.