pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
NRA Chief Says Group Accepts Background Checks
#1
http://nation.time.com/2013/01/17/nra-ch...nd-checks/

Quote:(WASHINGTON) — The head of the National Rifle Association says the organization has no problem with tighter background checks of gun purchasers.

I sure as hell hope this does not mean they are OK w/ the part that any transfer/sale must be precede by a background check.

That would mean NO GIFTING, and NO INHERITING w/o background checks.
Ladies of the Second Amendment

"I regard giving as necessary to right the balance" Hu Chung

http://appleseedusa.org/



Reply
#2
I've been giving this a lot of thought. These are my ideas on how we can throw the antis a bone without changing much.

1. Continue to allow transfers among family members as they are now.

2. Require a PICS/NICS check for other transfers with a new system. My idea for the system has the purchaser able to generate a self initiated background check either by computer or phone.

The check would be valid for 24 or 48 hours and could be printed out. It wouldn't be gun specific, it would simply be a verification that the person is not prohibited just as a PICS check is now. Going to a gun show in a state that doesn't require transfers or making a couple of private purchases? You may print out several and take them along. The seller would check the persons ID against the verification form. It could include a simple bill of sale at the bottom that the seller retains. An LTCF or similar would alleviate the need for the form.

A lot of private sellers already want to see an LTCF or recent 4473. It would streamline the process and not require going to an FFL. It could also be attached to the 4473 in lieu of a PICS check by the dealer. It would cut down on system backlogs during big gun shows and heavy buying days.
He was the sort of person who stood on mountaintops during thunderstorms in wet copper armour shouting "All the Gods are bastards."
Reply
#3
Publican;68483 Wrote:I sure as hell hope this does not mean they are OK w/ the part that any transfer/sale must be precede by a background check.

That would mean NO GIFTING, and NO INHERITING w/o background checks.

From what I read yesterday, even Obama is not calling for background checks between family members.

Look, I DO NOT like the expansion of background checks, but if it shuts the anti-s up, makes them think they closed the 'gun show loophole', and we get to keep buying high capacity magazines and other black rifles, I'll begrudgingly accept it because any banning of specific types of gun is more the 'beginning of the end' then requiring of private sales what you'd have to go through at a dealer anyway.

And I do like Jumbo's plan too.
Vampire pig man since September 2012
Reply
#4
The left lives and advances by incremental creep....they are fully content to move the goal posts slowly and patiently.

That's how our whole culture has been eroded.

You start with a little water runoff and you end with the Grand Canyon.
"In 4 more OMao years you won't like how America looks....I guarantee it."
“When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.” -- Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#5
unclejumbo;68497 Wrote:2. Require a PICS/NICS check for other transfers with a new system. My idea for the system has the purchaser able to generate a self initiated background check either by computer or phone.

The check would be valid for 24 or 48 hours and could be printed out.

I can generate any "printout" I need. A piece of paper is just that.

What is needed is the ability for the seller to verify by phone or online that the buyer is at this moment not a prohibited person. One of my ideas for that would be an automated phone system that upon entering the ID number and maybe the birth date from a LTCF responds with "valid" or "not valid". Which assumes that a LTCF is suspended when one is charged with a crime and revoked when convicted.

I know that this excludes people under the age of 21 at this time. I'm all in favor for lowering the age limit for LTCF though.


Jan
[Image: oh_no_not_again2.jpg]
Reply
#6
Fine but any such system would require the seller to keep the info in case in the future the buyer goes Newtown Nuts.

Maybe a better option would be PICS for all non-family and exempt LTCF holders. But no matter what they must be prohibited from keeping records - needs to be a Yes or No thing.

Oh, and anybody who ever vote of O, even just once, is stripped of all such rights. Tongue
Dave, proudly annoying members of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#7
unclejumbo;68497 Wrote:I've been giving this a lot of thought. These are my ideas on how we can throw the antis a bone without changing much.
...snip...


This is the part I just don't get. When do the antis ever throw us a bone? What 'anti-gun' legislation do the antis now hold dear that they re willing to give up in order to achieve these new goals? When in the past 50 years have the antis 'thrown us a bone' to keep us quiet?

And most of all, when have the antis ever been satisfied with the status of the 2A, or their recent wins against it? When have the antis ever turned down the temp of that pot of water?

I oppose any new restrictions for just these reasons. It is always 2A supporters giving ground, and that precious ground *never* addresses the root cause of the problem, and *never* seems to achieve their stated goals. Everything they ask for is always "a step in the right direction".

If every encroachment has been nothing more that a 'step", what is their end game? What is their goal-picture for guns, gun rights, etc., that the 'step' leads toward?

Maybe it's because I spent the first 48 years of my life in Maryland and saw first hand and personal where this is all headed. An interesting graphic I ran across recently, seems to address my feelings rather well.

[Image: 29104_zpsaafd5f65.png]

I want my fucking cake back. Dodgy
.
“Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.”

William Pitt
Reply
#8
Publican;68483 Wrote:http://nation.time.com/2013/01/17/nra-ch...nd-checks/

Quote:(WASHINGTON) — The head of the National Rifle Association says the organization has no problem with tighter background checks of gun purchasers.

I sure as hell hope this does not mean they are OK w/ the part that any transfer/sale must be precede by a background check.

That would mean NO GIFTING, and NO INHERITING w/o background checks.

As an NRA member, I certainly hope they mean ALL FIREARM SALES.

Including gifts.
Reply
#9
Why should we give the gun-grabbers a bone? They fight by inches. A more stringent background check under more circumstances now, gun registration and confiscation later.

They are in this for the long-term. Any little bit we give moves them closer to their goal. Why do this for them?

Why should we allow our rights to be slowly eroded away just so we don't loose more now. If congress won't pass an AWB, then why should we allow background checks in more circumstances to become federal law? Why not fight this tooth and nail all the way like the Left does? Why not make them fight long and hard for every violation of our rights that they want to force on us? Why compromise with people that ultimately want to destroy us? Isn't that like giving a robber $100 every time he comes to the house... except he comes more and more frequently, clears out your savings, and over time takes over your house. No thank you!
Reply
#10
Erosion.....starts as a trickle......ends as the Grand Canyon.

Those of us who have listened to this same ole stuff for 30, 40, 50 years.....it's clear to us.

Crystal clear.
"In 4 more OMao years you won't like how America looks....I guarantee it."
“When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty.” -- Thomas Jefferson
Reply






Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Top California official pushes ammo background checks and more das 0 475 10-20-2015, 10:56 AM
Last Post: das
  The Background Check Lie das 1 721 08-21-2015, 10:57 PM
Last Post: Mr_Gixxer
  The NRA is on the Frontline... jahwarrior72 1 674 01-07-2015, 07:17 AM
Last Post: Camper
  Hidden consequences of Washington State's gun background check das 1 669 11-02-2014, 04:26 PM
Last Post: ivwarrior
  Bloomberg group to poll U.S. candidates on gun stances bigdawgbeav 0 530 07-07-2014, 09:15 AM
Last Post: bigdawgbeav



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.