ActionfigureJoe Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 i’ve wondered this for some time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtralettucetomatoe580 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 What's being "checked"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted October 9, 2017 Author Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 minute ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said: No. why not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtralettucetomatoe580 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Because we are a nation of common law with precedent running back 250+ years and there are laws that outline reasonable restrictions to those rights when it comes to who is allowed to exercise the second amendment. Such as, being a murderer. Background checks ensure, or are supposed to ensure, that those laws are upheld. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Depending on who and how these background checks provide restriction they may well be unconstitutional. I do support background checks and a uniform system for completing them but I think that congress should amend the constitution to provide language facilitating this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted October 9, 2017 Author Share Posted October 9, 2017 31 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said: Because we are a nation of common law with precedent running back 250+ years and there are laws that outline reasonable restrictions to those rights when it comes to who is allowed to exercise the second amendment. Such as, being a murderer. Background checks ensure, or are supposed to ensure, that those laws are upheld. if my facts are correct, felons or those that were sentenced to more than 364 days in jail could legally possess firearms up until october 1968 when LBJ signed the gun control act. i wonder if that law has ever been challenged? if an individual has served their time via incarceration and extended supervision hasn’t their debt been paid? it seems rather odd to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SVT MXZ XRS Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 No Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ez ryder Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 no felons or any one convicted of stuff like burglary or violent crime even if not a felon for hand guns . but I think shot gun only restriction is felon and I think non violet felons can get there shotgun rights back with some lawyer $$$ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted October 9, 2017 Author Share Posted October 9, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ez ryder said: no felons or any one convicted of stuff like burglary or violent crime even if not a felon for hand guns . but I think shot gun only restriction is felon and I think non violet felons can get there shotgun rights back with some lawyer $$$ The NRA opposed senator Dodd’s amendment in 1963 to bar the possession of guns to criminals and mental patients. They also opposed the interstate transfer of guns via mail order. His bills never even made it for a session vote. I can remember looking at guns in a Montgomery Wards catalog. No background checks required. Just place your order. They’d ship it to your door. My dad bought a 30.30 marlin out of a catalog. Every new gun control law has followed some sort of tragedy. The “68 bill of Dodd’s was finally signed the week after RFK was shot Edited October 9, 2017 by ActionfigureJoe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Jimmy Snacks Posted October 9, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted October 9, 2017 (edited) The NRA opposes any sensible laws because of the slippery slope arguement and good for them because if they didn't who would? While some of their positions seem extreme there are those on the other side that are just as extreme or worse. Look I remember walking into High School with old side by side 20 gauge because the principal who was a gun guy wanted to take a look at it and obviously that would not fly today....things evolve and it's all a matter of moderating both extreme sides. Edited October 9, 2017 by Biggie Smails Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted October 9, 2017 Author Share Posted October 9, 2017 54 minutes ago, Biggie Smails said: The NRA opposes any sensible laws because of the slippery slope arguement and good for them because if they didn't who would? While some of their positions seem extreme there are those on the other side that are just as extreme or worse. Look I remember walking into High School with old side by side 20 gauge because the principal who was a gun guy wanted to take a look at it and obviously that would not fly today....things evolve and it's all a matter of moderating both extreme sides. but the arguement is that a person can kill with a knife, car, or truck? so whats the point of firearm background checks and restricting their distribution? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motonoggin Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Something being un/constitutional or il/legal won't change attitudes or mental health Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 2 minutes ago, motonoggin said: Something being un/constitutional or il/legal won't change attitudes or mental health Yup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motonoggin Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 minute ago, motonoggin said: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XCR1250 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 I buy a fair amount of guns each year, any domestic dispute where the cops were called can slow or prevent someone from purchasing a firearm of any type. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xtralettucetomatoe580 Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 58 minutes ago, motonoggin said: +100 Points for Trailer Park Boys reference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anler Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 Yes they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ez ryder Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 2 hours ago, Biggie Smails said: The NRA opposes any sensible laws because of the slippery slope arguement and good for them because if they didn't who would? While some of their positions seem extreme there are those on the other side that are just as extreme or worse. Look I remember walking into High School with old side by side 20 gauge because the principal who was a gun guy wanted to take a look at it and obviously that would not fly today....things evolve and it's all a matter of moderating both extreme sides. lol when I was in grade school I brought my 4 10 to school because,we needed them for firearms safety class after school . when I was in high school we had a skeet club and I brought my 16 gauge to school 2 days a week . we had to keep them in out locker and. oukd not take them out of the case in school Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poncho Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 20 minutes ago, Ez ryder said: lol when I was in grade school I brought my 4 10 to school because,we needed them for firearms safety class after school . when I was in high school we had a skeet club and I brought my 16 gauge to school 2 days a week . we had to keep them in out locker and. oukd not take them out of the case in school The last guy that brought a gun to my school, killed three, including himself and wounded 14 others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Jimmy Snacks Posted October 9, 2017 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted October 9, 2017 From what I gleaned from a quick search SCOTUS says background checks are Constitutional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oleroule Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 (edited) yes, if the purpose is to stop someone from having a firearm. '...shall not be infringed'. Edited October 9, 2017 by oleroule Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ActionfigureJoe Posted October 9, 2017 Author Share Posted October 9, 2017 1 minute ago, oleroule said: yes. '...shall not be infringed'. i agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ez ryder Posted October 9, 2017 Share Posted October 9, 2017 I just hope I am alive when they say they decide they are going to confiscate firearms . the sooner the better I say bring it on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.