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

I'm actually being serious......WHY you might ask? Because unlike the second amendment that stands in the way of their world domination plans....they actually like their freedom to lie and spread propaganda with impunity or restriction.

If you hit them back with something they would actually understand...you might get through the 3 inch thick skulls most of them have.

And besides....if they take way the second amendmnet away......do you think they are going to waste any time going after our freedom of speech next? Look how they act now when anyone questions the decrees and judgment of their Messiah now....they are absolutely intollerant of anyone that disagrees with their propaganda now....it would only get worse later...

Look what Happened under Stalin, Mao, Castro....etc...to anyone who had the audacity to speak against them.

Bone,
How about this? If someone has done something so serious as to cause him(her) to lose his constitutional right to guns, shouldn't they lose all their constitutional rights, such as the right to vote? Have voting registrars use the same background check for voting, as for gun owenership. Then see what the liberals have to say.You either have civil rights or you don't,if its in the constitution; it's a civil right.We need to start calling 2nd Amend. rights, civil rights.
Mike

Actually...in cases of Felony Convictions...They already do lose the right to vote, as well as posses a firearm. And can only get them back by petitioning the Gov of the state they reside...(but what about federal elections?)

I firmly believe in requiring photo IDs at the voting precincts...Nation wide.

Most other countries require it...the same countries that have socialized medicine the lefties love the idea of so much. (but wouldn't if they ever experienced the realities of it)

Mike, that's exactly what I'm getting at. Civil rights instead of 2cd amendment rights. Words are powerful. The words we choose to use define the debate and predict the likelihood of our success.

You have now and will have for the foreseeable future an activist Supreme Court. IMO, that means no rights, except those championed by the left, are safe, regardless of what your constitution says.

Like it or not, the Supremes bow to the court of public opinion over time and gun owners are losing badly there. We are now raising the generation that will have had the full impact of anti gun sentiment from their schools, media and government.

Bone,
Not all felony convictions cost the right to vote in all states,in Alabama it has to be a felony of "moral turpitude", in some states, a violent felony.For gun ownership, they don't make these distinctions.Actually, you don't even have to have a felony conviction to lose your right to own guns;in some cases not even a conviction of any kind is needed.Under the "Lautenberg(sp?)Ammendment", if your wife decides she wants her boyfriend to have your bass boat and takes out an "order of protection" to keep you from connecting it to your truck; then you won't be able to buy a deer rifle to replace the one she also gave her new boyfriend.The whole time, you didn't do anything wrong.
Canvasback,
You are right, we have to beat them at their own game.
Mike

This bears repeating.

Alcohol prohibition became law because the temperance movement made an emotional argument that was accepted as "common sense" by even some drinkers. And we all know how well that turned out. You could take many of the early 20th century anti-alcohol jeremiads and substitute "gun" for "liquor" and they would be all but verbatim for the current anti-gun positions. Logic and reason go out the window when the other side says they're in favor of childrens' safety, and by default we're not.

JonR,
Plus I can remember when "Separate But Equal", and Poll Tax, was considered "Common sense".Didn't they learn then, that there are no "common sense" restrictions on peoples freedoms?
Mike

You may have noticed that I have been referring to infringement of the Second Amendment as a violation of Civil Rights within this thread and within other threads for some time now. That's because that is exactly what it is. And I have been preaching that the proven way to call attention to, and reverse Civil Rights violations, is for the segment of society that is being violated to stick together and make it clear to their elected representatives that the violations will not be tolerated.

Similarly, I have wondered for many years how on earth a politician can put their hand on a Bible and swear an Oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution..." and then proceed to attempt to eviscerate the Second Amendment. Violations of the Oath of Office is grounds for impeachment. There is a legal process for adding or removing an Amendment from the Bill of Rights. I don't think the use of Executive Orders to bypass Congress was part of that prescription. The process was designed to be difficult to prevent irrational knee-jerk responses.

It became all too clear that we lost one vote during this thread. Homeless jOe has somehow come to the conclusion that a mentally ill criminal or gangbanger will pick up a gun and look at it and say, "I'd better not shoot anyone with this because its' serial number has been recorded during the universal backround check that was done on the person I stole it from, or the Straw Buyer who bought it for me." It became clear to me that jOe has been suckered in by the Anti-Gunners and he wishes to side with Obama, Biden, Feinstein, Schumer, Soros, Bloomberg, and all of the anti-gun crowd and give them the Gun Registration that they have been after for decades. I asked him if he was with us or against us. He gave us his answer. On this issue, he stands with Barack Hussein Obama. His feet are firmly planted and we aren't going to change his mind.

I don't think that makes him like nca225 or one of our other anti-gun trolls. I'd bet all my guns that jOe is an Honest to God gun guy. But I know he's mistaken on this. If you go back to jOe's very first post in this thread, he was complaining about a Memphis gunshop where it is not uncommon to see scary clientele saying, "man i'z look'n fr an AK 47 or a Uewzi" and that they are "legally selling the hell out of guns." So he apparently never asked himself, if these sales to questionable customers are being done legally through an FFL dealer, how would thing go any differently if there were Universal Backround Checks that included every sale at every gun show or private transaction, even one that was a gift from father to son??? None of us were able to convince him that Universal Checks would do absolutely nothing to stop criminals from acquiring guns, and would only place a costly burden on law abiding gun owners while supplying anti-gunners with information on the owners and where-abouts of every gun sold through legal channels. That's why I just stopped trying several pages back. I'm not mad at jOe, but I am disappointed that we weren't able to convince him over the course of a 20 page thread. I can't believe he chose to side with Obama on this issue when he knows Obama can't be trusted to tell you the correct time. I believe he'll eventually come around, but hopefully that happens before he loses a little more of his freedom and gets nothing in return.

So, it's time to move on and divert our energies to someplace where they might actually do some good. If we lost one supporter here, we need to put our efforts toward finding two supporters elsewhere. We need to call, write, and e-mail our Senators and Congressmen again, assuming we already have. We need to get our shooting friends to take a few minutes to do the same. The number one concern of most legislators is getting re-elected. We need to remind them that we will not vote for them if they violate our Civil Rights, in this case, the 2nd Amendment. We need to think about joining NRA or spend $25.00 on a gift NRA membership for a young shooter. We need to put this thread to bed and move on to greener pastures.

Keith, you are making my point for me. If in the course of 180 posts to this thread, we can't, as you suggest, change jOe's mind, an honest to goodness gun guy, what progress do you hope to make with the larger society. It has become apparent to me that the tactics are wrong. Facts, logic and a dependence of the "rights" conferred by the 2cd amendment will ultimately fail.

You make mention of the oaths of office, the systems in place for checks and balances. Those may all be true and real. But so far, in my lifetime, I don't really see them stopping the actions of those who would seek to dramatically change things. Why? Because before they change the laws (legally or illegally) they changed public opinion first.

We have either been missing that point, haven't thought it important up till now or been remarkably ineffective in our own public opinion swaying efforts.

I'm just convinced that most of the anti-gun crowd...much like Obama voters (not refering to people here in that comment) just aren't smart enough to be able to understand much less digest things like facts.

No matter HOW you present it...they just take the word of their propaganda minister as to what they should think. Because few of them are capible of thinking for themselves.